Author: Communication Department

On 4 September 2019, the United Nations Commission of Inquiry (CoI) presented its latest set of conclusions on the situation in Burundi. The only existing independent mechanism to monitor the country, it has warned of the high risks of human rights violations in the run-up to the elections.

For the third year running, the three UN experts composing the CoI have reported that widespread and systematic abuseswere going on in Burundi. In the continuum of the previous years, extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, arbitrary arrests and detentions, torture and sexual violence have been rampant in the last 12 months.

 

Everyone is a suspect  

Political opponents, in particular, are at risk of being persecuted. But according to the CoI, the definition of “political opposition” has now been broadened so much that it may include large parts of the population. Voicing dissenting is no longer required: perceived sympathy for any other party than the ruling one is sufficient. Even belonging to the family of a perceived “opponent” may lead to arrest, torture… or worse.

As a result, little-politicized citizens, including from very modest backgrounds, are now being targeted as dissenters. The CoI also emphasized that abuses were no longer confined to the capital Bujumbura: rural and isolated populations are now feeling the clamp-down, too.

The Commission identified another emerging category of victims: Burundian refugees returning from neighbouring countries. These findings contradict the government’s repeated claim that it is safe for exiled nationals to return.

 

Upcoming elections are likely to intensify violence

The UN experts have also warned that the 2020 presidential elections could further worsen the situation in Burundi. They called for “the utmost vigilance” from the international community and emphasized “the urgent need to implement (preventive) measures”. All eight common risk factors for criminal atrocities identified by the United Nations are satisfied in Burundi, according to the CoI.

Philip Grant, Executive Director of TRIAL International, agreed that international attention will be critical in the build-up to the elections: “The predominant feeling in Burundi is fear. People are scared to speak up, but this silence does not mean there are not abuses going on. We must not, in addition, give way to the government’s attempt to get rid of international monitoring. We must all come together to break this conspiracy of silence, and make sure Burundi stays high on the international agenda”.

Watch the full interview of Philip Grant, Executive Director of TRIAL International

A historic verdict in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) highlighted a widespread practice: the use of torture in prison, especially against activists. A reality that is all the more shocking since it is prohibited since 2011. The law was rarely applied … until this verdict.

 

Too often, activists and political dissidents are punished for their opinions © Pexel

On 21 August 2019, the Military Court of Bukavu gave its decision in a case TRIAL International had worked on for two years. It is one of the first cases in the DRC where judges have sentenced police officers for crimes of torture committed in detention.

They received sentences of 2,5 year and 15 months respectively – sentences that TRIAL International considers to be far too lenient. They also have been ordered to pay compensation, in solidarity with the Congolese state, of 5’000 USD to the victim, Emmanuel Kabuka.

M. Kabuka is a human rights activist. As a member of the NGO Héritiers de la Justice (Heirs of Justice), he denounces abuse at the hand of state agents. Mr. Kabuka was arrested in February 2017, when he opposed the arbitrary arrest of two women from his village. The police put him in jail in their place.

 

Human rights defenders are targets

In detention and out of sight, Mr. Kabuka was tortured. The police beat him, with their fists and with an iron club.

Torture in prison is not an exceptional situation in the DRC. The World Organization against Torture has even described it as an “open secret”. Several other NGOs, including Freedom from Torture, also noted that it was often used “to punish (activities) political activism and human rights, but also to discourage any future action”.

 

The law had remained an empty rhetoric

Acts of torture are all the more serious since a law criminalizing torture was passed in 2011. Hailed as a positive step, it finally made Congolese law compliant to international human rights protection standards.

However, this law did not have the desired effect. Due to its ineffective dissemination, judges seldom made use of it. That is why the verdict in the Kabuka case is a major step forward: it creates a legal precedent on which other judges can now rely.

“This case demonstrates the importance of training and informing local judiciary actors,” said Daniele Perissi, Head of the Great Lakes Program at TRIAL International. “A law can be perfectly written, it will be useless for the victims if it is not known about and applied correctly. ”

Learn more about building capacity in the Great Lakes

 

 

For the first time in history, the United Nations Committee against Torture (CAT) has condemned the Bosnian authorities for failing to fulfill their obligations toward a survivor of sexual violence. The UN body called on Bosnia and Herzegovina to pay the compensation requested by the victim, to issue an official apology, and to ensure that she receives immediate and free medical and psychological care.

“This decision is hugely important, and not only at the domestic level. It is the first decision by the CAT relating to a victim of conflict-related sexual violence, and the first to examine the applicability of the statute of limitations on compensation claims in torture cases”, said Adrijana Hanušić Bećirović, TRIAL International’s Senior Legal Advisor in Sarajevo.

 

Abandoned by the authorities

The complaint was the first one ever filed against Bosnia and Herzegovina. The victim, represented by TRIAL International, won her case before the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina in 2015, which ordered the perpetrator to pay compensation of BAM 30’000 (approximately EUR 15’000). The latter was not able make the payment for such an amount. Bosnia and Herzegovina did not have funds to cover the payment either. The complainant therefore received nothing.

At this stage, the only option theoretically available to her would be to institute civil proceedings to establish the liability of the State for compensation. However, the Constitutional Court ruled that such civil claims are subject to a statute of limitations of three to five years. As a result, victims are left with no effective legal recourse to obtain financial compensation. By ruling that statutes of limitations do not apply to victims of torture, the CAT has acknowledged the continuous trauma victims of torture experience. Statutes of limitations deprive survivors of the right to compensation and rehabilitation they need in breach of States’ obligations under Article 14 of the Convention Against Torture.

In its decision, the CAT requests Bosnia and Herzegovina to pay compensation to the complainant and to ensure that she receives immediate and free medical and psychological care. The State is also required to issue an official apology to the victim. The ground-breaking decision also states that Bosnia and Herzegovina must establish an effective reparation scheme at the national level to provide all forms of redress to victims of war crimes – including sexual violence. The CAT also urges Bosnia and Herzegovina to develop and adopt a framework law that clearly defines the criteria for obtaining the status of victim of war crimes and sets out the specific rights guaranteed to victims by the State.

Read the full decision adopted by the CAT

 

On the International Day of the Victims of Enforced Disappearances, TRIAL International remembers all the families torn apart by this crime.

Under international law, enforced disappearance is a crime distinct from confinement or extrajudicial execution: the uncertainty, and the constant swing between hope and disillusionment, has been recognized to amount to psychological torture.

Among the many victims is the courageous Katwal family. For over a decade, they have fought Nepalese authorities to find their husband and father, Chakra Bahadur Katwal. His daughter Kamala agreed to narrate their journey.

 

 

FIND OUT MORE

About this case
About the crime of enforced disappearance
About TRIAL International’s actions in Nepal

Impunity did not stop with the end of the civil war in Nepal. In a landmark decision issued on 22 August 2019, the United Nations Human Rights Committee (HRC) condemned Nepal for having violated a young man’s fundamental rights, and called for the case to be investigated, the perpetrators to be held accountable and reparations to be granted. 

Forced to work every day from 4am to 10pm, beaten all over his body, hit with plastic pipes on the soles of his feet, electrocuted on the tips of his finger nails; the brutal treatments inflicted by an army official and the Nepalese police in 2012 on a 14-year-old child are chilling. Such practices – and the lack of prosecution of the perpetrators – did not cease with the end of the civil war in 2006. The case of Bholi Pharaka (pseudonym) is emblematic of the impunity enjoyed by State officials in peacetime.

 

A landmark decision from the HRC

Following a complaint submitted by TRIAL International, the HRC condemned Nepal for the torture and forced labor endured by Bholi Pharaka between the ages of 11 to 14. Among other measures of reparation, he must receive educational support and free of charge medical and psychological care. An investigation into the facts is also due; during which suspected perpetrators shall be suspended or removed from their duties.

Nepal has a record of turning a deaf ear to HRC decisions. To foster implementation of its Views in the country, for the first time the HRC has requested the government to identify the domestic authorities in charge of granting each measure of reparation and provide this information within the next 180 days.

“Legislation related to torture and forced labor, especially concerning minors, is clearly deficient”, said Helena Rodríguez-Bronchú Carceller, Head of TRIAL International’s Nepal program. “The decision points out that the recent criminalization of torture is still at odds with international standards. This is not the first time that the rampant impunity in Nepal has been denounced by the UN. But this case shows how the lack of accountability operates, not only because of the legal loopholes, but also because of the unchecked power State officials enjoy.”

 

Bholi Pharaka’s story

Aged 14, Bholi Pharaka was accused of theft by his foster family, including an army officer who was supposed to sponsor Bholi Pharaka’s education. Instead, they forced him to work every day non-stop from the age of 11. They never gave him any compensation or allowed him to attend school. Escaping from the family’s house did not put an end to his suffering. The family used its power and influence to push a fake complaint against him forward. He was arrested, tortured by the police, and forced to confess by stamping his fingerprints on a document he was not able to read. He was then detained for nine months without clear charges brought against him.

When he sought to denounce the torture and forced labor he had suffered, the Nepalese authorities repeatedly ignored his claims, and sometimes even refused to register them altogether. To date, none of the perpetrators have been prosecuted or punished, and Bholi Pharaka has received no reparation for the harm suffered. In an attempt to assert his rights outside Nepal, he referred his case to the HRC in 2016.

Read the full decision here

The Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina has dismissed the request for a review of the civil procedure laws on court fees, made by twelve members of parliament in collaboration with TRIAL International. Currently, citizens who sue state entities and lose their case must cover the expenses of public prosecutors according to the same tariff applied to private lawyers, thus discouraging vulnerable people, including victims of war crimes.

It is a known rule in civil proceedings that the party who loses a litigation bears its own costs, and also those of the adverse party. But when citizens, particularly vulnerable groups such as victims of war crimes, find themselves on the losing side of a verdict, the fees become a major challenge. The costs of the public attorneys are calculated in the same way as the costs of lawyers (including lawyer’s fees), all in accordance with the profession’s fee and remuneration tariff. The costs for unsuccessful complainants are therefore very high.

In an attempt to resolve this problem, twelve members of the House of Representatives of the Parliamentary Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina submitted a request for a revision of the Law on Civil Procedure to the Constitutional Court last year. The latter has just issued its decision and rejects their request, considering that these provisions are in accordance with the Constitution and international standards. In its view, only the relevant legislature is competent to determine the rules and principles of civil procedure, including the reimbursement of expenses.

“The high cost of these fees is particularly problematic for victims who have been traumatized for many years because of the horrors they have experienced. They still have to endure additional psychological harm”, said Adrijana Hanušić Bećirović, TRIAL International’s Senior Legal Advisor. “International and regional standards, however, require states to provide their citizens with effective remedy and minimize the risk of re-traumatization of victims of human rights violations.”

For Nedim Ademović, a lawyer at the European Court of Human Rights who also supported the request for review before the Constitutional Court, “because of the fear of large expenses, citizens are not guaranteed the full right to access the court”. In his view, this practice constitutes both a violation of the right to property and a violation of constitutional principles such as the “rule of law” and the principle of the single market. “It is absurd that public attorneys are enabled an identical system of calculating the fees and remuneration for lawyer’s work while they are not subject to the same charges and are financed by public budgets.“

This setback does not discourage the Bosnian office of TRIAL International, which intends to continue working with parliamentarians to amend these legal provisions.

Lenin Bista was born in 1990. In 2002, as civil war raged in Nepal, he joined the Maoist party, thus becoming one of the many child soldiers that were used during the conflict. He recalls.

TRIAL International: Why did you join the Maoists?

Lenin Bista: At the time, we only had three choices: join the Government, join the Maoist Party or leave the country. Some people chose to leave, but I was a child so I couldn’t. The Maoists came to my village, they were singing, talking about equality and nationalism. I joined the group along with four other friends about the same age. Two are dead now. We did not know anything about the Maoist movement; we simply liked the speech and the program.

 

So, joining the Maoists was not strictly politically motivated… 

The slogan back then was “One house – One Maoist“. Compulsory. The Nepalese security forces often tortured people and beat villagers to get information, sometimes rape and kill innocent people. In response, families automatically join this group.

 

What role did you play in the guerrilla?

I was a member of the intelligence group of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), my work was to go to the cities and police or army camps, and recall information, see what is there, and report to our commander to prepare for the next attack. We were trained on how to make a bomb, how to use guns. I took part in two attacks: one we won, the other we lost many friends and ran back. When the army came, we have two options: run or fight.

 

 

What happened when the war ended?

After the peace agreement was signed in 2006, we stayed in cantonment for four years. I was 18-19 when I came back to my village. The UN and Nepal Government promised us some opportunities, education. But one year after, nothing had changed.

 

You started to advocate for the rights of the former child soldiers…

We created an organisation called D-PLAN (Discharged People’s Liberation Army Nepal). We peacefully demonstrated; we went to our ex-commander’s headquarter asking for opportunities. In response, they vandalised my home and kidnapped me. I escaped and I had to hide for one month. After a few months the Government led by Maoists put me in jail for one exact year for asking for education.

 

With how many other ex-child soldiers are you in contact?

Nowadays there are more 4000 ex child soldiers in our organisation. We work voluntarily, we are not a funded organisation. We have no real database, we stay in contact via Facebook or by phone, or directly from friend to friend. We have connections in every district.

 

The Nepalese Government seems to be uncomfortable with the issues you and your organisation rise. How does this affect you?

Six months ago, they stopped me at the airport. The government feared for its image, and that Nepal could be accused of war crimes. They tried to stop me speaking about child soldiers.

 

If the Nepalese Government is not willing to help you, who will?

We filed a report to the UN because we want former child soldiers to have a better future in Nepal. The UN only hears about reports filed by the Government, saying that everything is ok in the country. But we lived these years of conflict. As former child soldiers, we speak about these things as a first-handed experience. I hope the UN will help.

 

Denis von der Weid is the founder and president of the Antenna Foundation, which has been supporting TRIAL International for many years. He is passionate about human rights, believing that innovation must help everyone, not a privileged minority.

“I created the Antenna Foundation in 1989 on the basis of a shocking fact: 80% of the technologies developed only benefit 10% of the world’s population. Why is this? How have we reached a situation where innovation is at the service of futility and commercial gain, instead of developing research which would help ensure a dignified life for all?

The mandate of the Antenna Foundation is to encourage the development of concrete tools which improve the daily lives of the most disadvantaged, such as chlorination to make water drinkable or disinfect it, or the Argemone, a medicinal plant to treat malaria. We carry out as much research as we do application and distribution on the ground.”

 

Access to justice is one of the fundamental rights

“We support TRIAL International because we have the same vision of human rights. We want them to be effective and embodied. Law cannot remain declarative, beautiful words on paper which do not materialise in a concrete way in people’s lives. It must ensure the dignity of every individual. There must be access to food, water, health, education… and, of course, justice.

The action taken by TRIAL International is crucial, as it forces governments to react. Ratifying texts without enforcing them is just as sterile as developing technologies which only benefit a privileged minority. In both cases, millions of people continue living in deplorable conditions.

What good is the law, if it does not ensure justice? Many other organisations should carry out the same work, so that all laws inscribed in the major international conventions are reflected in their actions.”

 

Human rights in the digital age

“I see a close link between fundamental rights and new technologies related to basic needs. In this area, there is unexplored potential, including in the search for evidence. The creative use of technologies is, in my view, an area to develop at TRIAL International.

Innovative initiatives, such as the development of audio-visual evidence for trials in the DRC, are only the first step. The most important thing is that these precedents are made available to the greatest number possible. Technology should be accessible by all, for all, so that marginal success can become a driver of change on a large scale.

When everyone has the concrete means, including in a technological sense, of asserting their rights, we will have met our goal. Patience, patience!”

Find out more about the Antenna Foundation

 

The way to justice is often a long and arduous process for the victims of sexual violence who try to assert their rights. Even if they manage to overcome the obstacles to the opening of legal proceedings, they still have to face disappointing judgements, which are often too lenient, and are inconsistent from case to case.

Victims of sexual violence who wish to prosecute their perpetrators must overcome many barriers, whether it is the stigma associated with the crime they have suffered, the psychological trauma, financial problems or the lack of information on how to seek redress. Then, if their cases finally lead to the conviction of the perpetrators, the sanctions are often weak, if not ridiculous. This is due to a lack of transparency in the application of aggravating and mitigating factors, as well as in the reasoning behind judgments. In addition to the low severity of sentences, the penalties imposed for such crimes in Bosnia and Herzegovina are inconsistent and do not reflect the extent of the victim’s suffering.

 

Need for unification

In an attempt to unify practices in this area, TRIAL International has published two guides for judges and investigators, based on the analysis of over 100 judgments from the different courts in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Both publications were presented at a recent round table in Sarajevo that brought together relevant stakeholders – judges, prosecutors and representatives of non-governmental and international organizations.

 

Strengthening training

In particular, lack of training was identified as one of the main causes of inconsistencies in sentencing. In this regard, TRIAL International intends to strengthen its cooperation with the training centres for judges and prosecutors of the Republika Srpska and the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina. New training on procedures related to sexual violence will attempt to establish new practices among judges and prosecutors dealing with these cases, including a systematic critical analysis of mitigating and aggravating circumstances.

It also emerged from these discussions that the existing arrangements – which alleviate financial penalties and, in some cases, allow prison sentences to be converted into fines – must be challenged.

TRIAL International calls on the various judicial actors to continue discussions on their respective practices in investigating and prosecuting cases of sexual violence. Their respective roles must be constantly adapted to ensure that victims achieve the most satisfactory outcome possible in the future.

An op-ed by Philip Grant, Executive director at TRIAL International

On 12 August 2019 we celebrate the 70^thanniversary of the Geneva Conventions. Philip Grant, founder and Executive Director at TRIAL International, explains why these texts remain relevant and valuable today.

The Geneva Conventions are a set of four treaties, expanded in 1977 by two important additional protocols. They aim to reduce and control the brutality of warfare. They protect those individuals who are not involved in the fight (such as civilians) or have stopped fighting (such as the wounded, the sick or the prisoners of war). To this day, they remain among the most widely ratified treaties in the world.

I have a particular attachment to these Conventions, whose story is closely linked to that of my home city Geneva. TRIAL was founded to ensure Switzerland upheld this humanitarian law heritage, not just as a host for institutions but also by making sure it would prosecute and punish suspects residing in or entering its territory.

As part of its litigation efforts, TRIAL International regularly invokes the Geneva Conventions. 70 years after their adoption, they remain a crucial part of the human rights defenders’ arsenal. But the worth of these texts is not just legal. They contain two critical lessons that remain relevant today.

 

Law as a living matter

The first lesson is historical. Because they were drafted in a widely different context from ours, the Conventions regularly come under attack for being obsolete. Such criticism was particularly virulent after 9/11 and the subsequent rise of non-state actors on the international scene.

But we must remember that the law is a living, ever-evolving subject, destined to adapt to new situations and challenges. This conviction lies at the heart of TRIAL’s mandate, which seeks to open up innovative ways to justice for victims of atrocities. It is up to each practitioner and activist to push back the boundaries of the law in their everyday work. In other words, the texts will only ever go as far as we take them.

With this rationale in mind, we are convinced that the Geneva Conventions are still very much relevant today, and will remain so for a long time.

 

Inalienable human dignity

The second lesson is moral, almost philosophical. The Conventions are based on the recognition of inalienable human dignity, even in the worst settings and especially to the most vulnerable. At TRIAL, we believe that fighting for justice is one way of upholding this dignity right where it has been trampled.

The awareness of one’s fundamental worth is both a trigger and a consequence of our beneficiary’s long quest for justice. From powerless victims, they become rights-holders. Empowered by the law, they become agents in their own lives again. That’s why their path to justice is often also one of closure and reconstruction.

On this anniversary, the Geneva Conventions actually teach us a third point. They originated from the vision of a single and exceptional individual, Henry Dunant, who believed in his own ability to make a change. It took decades for this vision to become a reality, but when it did it changed the international legal order forever. This lesson of perseverance inspires us today and fuels our vision for the future we must build together.

 

Portraits of volunteers #4

Since 2018, twelve volunteers have taken on the specific mission of translating TRIAL International’s website news. To thank them for their invaluable commitment, the “Portraits of volunteers” series gives them the floor. Today is the turn of Alice Murgier, student lawyer at the Paris Bar and volunteer since 2017.

When and how did you hear about TRIAL?

During my Master’s degree in Law, I chose modules on human rights and international criminal law. I really liked these subjects and wanted to steer my career in that direction.

That’s how I learned about TRIAL; I regularly read articles on their website to stay informed. And one day I saw that they were recruiting volunteer translators, so I applied!

It was interesting to go from reader to translator: I now read articles a lot more attentively and do additional research around them. It is important to understand the topic to avoid mistakes, so I have acquired a more detailed knowledge of subjects related to international law.

What are you doing at the moment?

I am a student lawyer at the Paris Bar. Before that, I studied human rights law in Paris and Chicago. I then worked at the United Nations and for NGOs, before taking the bar. As part of a work-study program, I also do pro bono work in an Anglo-Saxon law firm.

The legal procedures undertaken by TRIAL are particularly close to my interests, since I will be a qualified lawyer in 2020. I think it’s very important to support international criminal justice.

What have you learned since you started volunteering?

My translation skills have greatly improved. Indeed, I am bilingual thanks to my dual French-American citizenship, and translating official documents has sharpened my language skills.

I also learn a lot by reading the content of articles before they are published. Furthermore, Translating articles requires sticking to precise timeframes, which is good practice for respecting deadlines.

 

Read the interview of Stefanie Ujma

Read the interview of Emma Bradding

 

Can videos taken with a smartphone help prosecute and punish mass crimes? This is the goal of the eyeWitness project; seeking to fight impunity by enabling human rights defenders, journalists, and ordinary citizens to capture verifiable audiovisual evidence of abuse.

At the crossroads of law and technology, eyeWitness offers a unique complement to TRIAL’s litigation expertise. Their collaboration, along with the third NGO, WITNESS, contributed to the conviction of two militiamen in the Kamananga case (DRC) in 2018.

 

Transforming videos into evidence

Technology is increasingly used to document crimes, but eyeWitness goes beyond this initial stage. “Enabling the collection of videos, and especially guaranteeing the security of the documenter, is paramount. But it is a long journey before that video is shown in a courtroom, and documenting efforts come to naught if the rest of the chain is not watertight”, explains eyeWitness Director Wendy Betts.

Therefore, the eyeWitness smartphone app not only allows safe collection for documenters on the ground, but also guarantees secure transmission and storage of the footage afterwards. This ensures it will meet traceability requirements later in court.

Additionally, all the footage received on the eyeWitness server is carefully curated and catalogued, building up a database of potential evidence. That, believes Wendy Betts, is the second added value of eyeWitness: “We serve both documenters collecting evidence and investigators who can act upon this evidence, essentially bridging the gap between them. We have over 7’000 submissions stored and at the disposal of prosecution authorities and non-judicial mechanisms (such as international commissions of inquiry or factfinding missions) or any other actor who could use footage to prove a crime and see the perpetrators brought to justice”.

 

A bottom-up process stemming from concrete needs

The project was initiated in 2011 by the International Bar Association (IBA). The emergence of amateur videos from conflict zones, usually taken with smartphones and posted on social media, raised the question of their weight as criminal evidence. Even as individuals risked their lives to report crimes, their footage had little impact in legal proceedings as their reliability was called into question. The eyeWitness project was civil society’s response.

Four years of research were necessary to develop the app. “We adopted a bottom-up approach to identify the need as precisely as possible”, explains Betts. “We consulted with legal practitioners, looked at existing tools and read extensive case-law, both domestic and international, on admissibility standards.”

Once the project was clearly circumscribed, the technological development of a prototype and a phase of commercial development followed. Today, the app has been downloaded over 11’000 times, and the number of submitted videos is sky-rocketing.

 

Expert support ensures tailored solutions

Four full-time staff members and a roster of 40 pro bono lawyers offer their expertise to ensure the videos serve an investigation or a trial reliably and compellingly. Since each jurisdiction has specific rules of admissibility, each solicitation calls for a tailor-made response. “But the requirement of traceable transmission and storage – what is called the chain of custody – is a constant”, tempers Betts.

So, can eyeWitness secure the condemnation of the worst criminals? Betts is cautiously optimistic: “As powerful as audiovisual material can be, it cannot stand alone in a trial. It must be complementary to other forms of incriminating evidence, such as testimonies, documentary research, etc. But when it is, like in the Kamananga verdict in DRC, it can be a real game-changer.”

 

TRIAL International’s work on the Kamananga case was conducted in the framework of the Task Force for International Criminal Justice, an informal network of international actors collaborating to support the work of Congolese military jurisdictions in the investigation and prosecution of mass crimes in DRC.

The Government of Nepal has failed to fulfill its commitment to provide justice for the victims of the country’s decade-long armed conflict, Amnesty International, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), Human Rights Watch (HRW), and TRIAL International said today.

The organizations echoed statements by victims and human rights groups about the Nepal government’s inaction on addressing conflict-era human rights violations, and a lack of transparency in the appointment of commissioners to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and to the Commission on the Investigation of Enforced Disappearances.

 

Unkept promises

After being elected in 2018, Prime Minister Khadga Prasad Oli renewed promises that the legal framework governing the transitional justice process would be brought into conformity with Nepal’s international human rights law obligations, as the Supreme Court had repeatedly directed. However, the government never amended the law, and instead pushed forward – without adequate consultation – with the establishment of a committee to recommend appointments to the transitional justice bodies. “The failure of the government to deliver on its commitment to ensure truth, justice and reparations for the victims of conflict-era abuses shows a dismaying disregard for the protection of human rights,” said Meenakshi Ganguly, South Asia director at HRW.

 

The organizations call on the government to:

1. suspend the current process, and initiate a consultative and transparent process for the nomination and appointment of commissioners;
2. follow through on commitments to amend the 2014 transitional justice law to ensure that the legal framework is consistent with international human rights standards and Supreme Court rulings;
3. adopt and publicize a plan for taking the transitional justice process forward.

 

“The legitimacy of Nepal’s transitional justice process lies both on a transparent and consultative appointment process for commissioners, and a strong legal foundation to allow the commissions to fulfil their mandate,” said Helena Rodríguez-Bronchú, head of TRIAL International’s Nepal program. “Societal consensus is crucial for both factors.”

 

Read the full press release

Portraits of volunteers #3

Since 2018, twelve volunteers have taken on the specific mission of translating TRIAL International’s website news. To thank them for their invaluable commitment, the “Portraits of volunteers” series gives them the floor. In this portrait, we introduce Stefanie Ujma, a freelance consultant from Lyon (France).

“I have been a volunteer translator for TRIAL since 2014. A teacher at the University of Edinburgh sent me the volunteering offer, which is how I first heard of the NGO for the first time. Since I started volunteering, I have learnt a lot about international geopolitical contexts, legal proceedings and international organizations.

Although it may not be immediately apparent, my academic background does have a common thread: human interactions. After graduating in international business, I studied foreign languages and specialized in translating and interpreting. I then went on to complete a Master’s degree in intercultural management and international communications. Now I offer freelance consultancy in project management for companies.”

Making information engaging and understandable

“My background makes me very conscious of how access to information can contribute to TRIAL’s mission and to international justice. I help by popularizing topics that deserve greater attention in the media. Making information accessible, engaging and understandable is paramount in my opinion.

Volunteering has also improved my general knowledge and taught me to think more critically about the way I keep myself informed. I have broadened my interests, sharpened my critical thinking and gained a better understanding of politics.”

“A welcome complement to my professional activity”

“Moreover, volunteering is a way of keeping my language skills up to scratch. Since I started, I have improved my translation techniques and acquired new vocabulary in French and English.

As soon as I receive a translation assignment, I check my professional and personal calendars. I always secure two time slots, usually in the evening or during the week-end, so I am sure to meet the deadline. It’s not a constraint but a pleasure, because I enjoy doing it!

Translating is a time-consuming activity that requires concentration. In my busy daily life, I value its positive effects; it forces me to sit down and temporarily disconnect from everything else. It is a welcome complement to my professional activity.”

 

Read the interview of Emma Bradding 

Read the interview of Aleksandra Chlon

 

As we celebrate the 21st World Day for International Justice, it can hardly be denied that this anniversary has lost some of its shine. With the ICC, and transitional justice in general, coming under regular attack, what is there to celebrate? TRIAL International takes the view that these criticisms are actually a sign of strength, and can even be beneficial to the fight against impunity.

The first World Day for International Justice was celebrated on 17 July 1998, on the day the Statute of Rome was signed, which marks the creation of the International Criminal Court (ICC) –a historic milestone in a period of intense optimism vis-à-vis international justice.

Fast-forward to 2019, the landscape is unrecognizable. Populism is on the rise and international justice is no longer the priority. The ICC is accused of being biased and inefficient. Several countries have threatened to leave it, and one –Burundi – actually did.

Yet in an interview or the International Bar Association, ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda said she was unsurprised by the opposition faced by her institution: “There’s been pushback (…) because the ICC is doing its work. (…) There’s bound to be pushback by those who feel they’re being targeted.”

Could opposition to the fight against impunity be, somewhat counterintuitively, a sign of its success? After all, an inefficient system would not be perceived as a threat. “A strong-willed international justice is disruptive”, confirms Philip Grant, Executive Director of TRIAL International. “The States which supported the ICC’s creation perhaps thought that their own creation would not turn against them (…). How many countries have renewed their unbending support to the Court after it incriminated its rulers? None.”

Under this light, the harsh criticisms against international justice do not seem so grim. But could they even be beneficial to the cause?

 

“Resistance is a normal part of the process”

Academic Dr Briony Jones shares Bensouda’s lack of surprise. “Transitional justice (…) touches upon concepts of social contract, citizenship, democracy, representation… It is therefore unsurprising that it is sometimes met with resistance or skepticism.”

But Jones goes even further and encourages us to embrace criticism: “Resistance has traditionally been seen as negative, but I think of it as a normal part of the process and it can even be constructive. Post-conflict justice processes are driven by a minority of people holding power, often abiding to mainstream narratives. There should be a space for alternative narratives and dissenting voices too.”

In other words, much like in politics, an openness to objection is a sign of strength, not of weakness. Only unconfident systems need repress and stifle criticism. Now in its third decade, the international justice system is strong enough to cope with objections.

The next step, according to Briony Jones? “NGOs need to (…) question their own assumptions and perceptions on transitional justice and remain as open and collaborative as possible, including with actors with a different perspective. (…) If the NGOs stop seeing these actors as threats and start paying heed, they have the potential to make transitional justice stronger, more credible and more efficient.”

Read the full interview with Briony Jones

Portraits of volunteers #2

Since 2018, twelve volunteers have taken on the specific mission of translating TRIAL International’s website news. To thank them for their invaluable commitment, the “Portraits of volunteers” series gives them the floor. In this episode, meet Emma Bradding, a law student in the UK. Thanks to her fluency in French, she has been a volunteer translator for TRIAL since 2017.

“I have always been passionate about modern languages and human rights-related causes. So, a few years ago, I decided to put my language skills to good use by supporting the work of TRIAL.

I studied French and Spanish for my undergraduate degree at Durham University (UK) and am currently studying law in London. I am due to start a training contract at a commercial law firm in the second half of 2019.”

An advocate of TRIAL’s work

“I am particularly interested in the work TRIAL undertakes to fight conflict-related sexual violence, notably in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burundi, DRC and Nepal. I support TRIAL’s holistic approach to fighting impunity. For example, regarding crimes of sexual violence, it provides ‘capacity-building sessions’ on how evidence can be efficiently collected without further traumatizing victims.

I also respect that TRIAL takes action to get countries to prosecute cases where there is lack of political will, or there are delays in proceedings, such as in the Khaled Nezzar and Rifaat al-Assad cases in Switzerland.”

Discovering TRIAL

“During the third year of my studies, I worked at a press relations agency in Paris, which enabled me to develop my translation skills in a professional setting. The following year, I was looking to volunteer for an NGO. That was when a friend and volunteer at TRIAL recommended I volunteer too, and I have translated for the organization ever since.

I have gained a deeper understanding of the interaction between national and international law in the context of human rights, especially in terms of universal jurisdiction. I also have a greater awareness of the complexities involved in gathering evidence where a significant amount of time has elapsed since the crimes were committed.

In addition, translating for TRIAL has underscored the importance of ensuring that messages are conveyed clearly and cogently to their target audience. This will be an important skill when I work as a solicitor, as I will have to communicate with different types of clients.”

And finally…

“I would highly recommend volunteering for TRIAL, as it is both interesting and rewarding. The website is a really useful resource when translating texts, and I would encourage readers to explore it. TRIAL also produces a monthly newsletter, which is a great way to stay up to date with TRIAL’s work.”

 

Read the interview of Aleksandra Chlon

 

Emmanuelle Marchand is a Senior Legal Counsel and Investigator for the NGO Civitas Maxima. Like TRIAL International, it collects evidence of the worst atrocities, bringing them to the attention of prosecution authorities. In this interview, she gives us an insight into her job in the field, which highlights the key role of NGOs in the fight against impunity.

“My first mission for Civitas Maxima was in 2013 in Liberia. It was also my first experience of Africa, a real change! Fortunately, like many NGOs in the area, Civitas Maxima already had an efficient local network. My Liberian colleagues, and those from the Ivory Coast, knew the context perfectly and I learned to understand it thanks to them.

Quickly, we naturally found a complementary way of working, which we still possess today. They manage the first stage of the investigation, collect the initial information and contact victims and witnesses. My colleagues from Geneva and I then come in, if necessary, to interview the victims and define the legal strategy. It is essential to be realistic and modest; as a foreigner, I will never have the same ability as them to build trust. And my trips will always be less discreet…

Working in a foreign setting also has its advantages. You are forced to adapt your behavior, which makes you more attentive to that of others. You have to consider all your own habits to understand another way of living and being. In light of my previous experiences, notably in Cambodia, I notice common characteristics in very different contexts, such as the resilience of survivors, and the way in which life prevails even after mass crimes.”

 

NGOs and national authorities complement one another

“Specialized NGOs are a crucial link in collecting evidence. We are mobile and flexible in a way that the legal authorities are not, so we are often more responsive and better established locally. However, our work is useless if national authorities refuse to initiate a case against a suspect. Serving justice remains a sovereign power and civil society cannot, should not and will not replace it! So, our missions complement one another.

Despite this, some prosecutors or magistrates of national authorities sometimes act ambivalently towards NGOs, even those specialized in investigations and collecting evidence. On the one hand, they need to rely on information collected by NGOs and on their access to information sources. On the other hand, they feel frustrated at not carrying out the entire process from beginning to end, as they would usually do. You also feel sometimes that trust is lacking. Fortunately, in most cases the relationship with the national authorities is constructive and things go well.

Moreover, the increase in the number of universal jurisdiction cases is a real opportunity. Faced with the complexity of the cases, all players must pull together. And the more we cooperate, the more we get to know each other and the more trust is built.”

 

In Liberia, a paradigm shift

“Every time I go back to Liberia, I can see the progress that has been made. Several senior officials implicated in atrocities have been arrested or sentenced outside the country, resulting in a real paradigm shift. They are no longer perceived as all-powerful and unassailable; justice in Liberia has become a concrete possibility.

The fight against impunity is now a regular topic in the national media. Demonstrations in favor of a national prosecution mechanism are increasing. Liberians have appropriated the search for justice and do not intend to stop there! The fear has changed camps, and it is now the former executioners who are not quiet.”

 

Learn more about universal jurisdiction

Learn more about the action taken by Civitas Maxima