Search This Blog

Showing posts with label UNWGAD. Show all posts
Showing posts with label UNWGAD. Show all posts

Wednesday, 10 June 2015

UN GROUP CALLS FOR WRITER’S RELEASE

The United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (UNWGAD) has joined other international bodies in calling for the immediate release from jail of the Swazi human rights lawyer and writer Thulani Maseko.

Last month (May 2015), the European Parliament made a similar declaration, joining human rights organisations across the globe.

In a statement issued on Wednesday (10 June 2015), the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) welcomed the opinion by The United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (UNWGAD) which condemned as ‘arbitrary’ the detention of Maseko and also called on the Swaziland Government to release him immediately.

UNWGAD acted after a petition from the ICJ, the law firm Hogan Lovells US LLPS and the American Bar Association Center for Human Rights.

UNWGAD affirmed that the Swaziland government’s detention of Maseko was unlawful and that his rights to freedom of expression, liberty, and to a fair trial had been violated.

In addition to his immediate release, the UNWGAD said he should be paid ‘adequate compensation, enforceable by law’.

Maseko was jailed for two years for contempt of court along with Bheki Makhubu, editor of the Nation, a small circulation monthly comment magazine in Swaziland, where King Mswati III rules as sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch, after they wrote and published articles critical of the Swazi judiciary.

Arnold Tsunga, Director of ICJ’s Africa Regional Programme, said in a statement, ‘This opinion by the WGAD is important not only because it advances Thulani Maseko’s quest for justice, but also because of the message it sends to the Swazi Government and judiciary that they are responsible for guaranteeing basic rule of law and human rights principles.

‘We call on the Government to execute the opinion of the UNWAD and immediately release Thulani Maseko and afford him reparation for his arbitrary detention.’

In its opinion taken during its 72nd session between 20 and 29 April 2015, the UNWGAD determined that the detention of Maseko was arbitrary because it had been carried out in violation of his right to freedom of opinion and expression and as a result of numerous fair trial violations, including by judicial officials.

The UNWGAD concluded that Chief Justice Michael Ramodibedi and High Court Judge Mpendulo Simelane, the judges ordering (and re-ordering) Maseko’s detention who were also involved in the conduct of the trial had not conducted themselves impartially.

Their conduct resulted in Maseko’s denial of a fair trial before an independent and impartial court as required under international law and standards, UNWGAD said.

The UNWGAD also found violations of a number of other fair trial rights, including the denial of Maseko’s right to legal assistance.

On 21 May 2015 Members of the European Parliament meeting in plenary session called for the immediate release of Maseko and Makhubu. They said, ‘[T]heir imprisonment relates directly to the legitimate exercise of their right to freedom of expression.’
They also called for the release of all political prisoners, including Mario Masuku, President of the People’s United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO), and Maxwell Dlamini, Secretary-General of the Swaziland Youth Congress (SWAYOCO).
See also

FREE POLITICAL PRISONERS: EURO MPs

Thursday, 19 February 2015

JAILED JOURNALISTS CASE GOES TO UN



Leading international lawyers are asking a United Nations working group to rule whether the jailing of a Swaziland magazine editor and human rights lawyer for publishing articles critical of the kingdom’s judiciary are lawful.

They have filed a petition with the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (UNWGAD) in Geneva regarding the cases of Bheki Makhubu, the editor of the Nation magazine and Thulani Maseko, a lawyer and writer.

The American Bar Association’s Center for Human Rights, the global law firm Hogan Lovells and the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) jointly produced a petition calling for the UNWGAD to issue an opinion regarding the lawfulness of the continued incarceration of the two men.

They allege a range of human rights violations by Swaziland, where King Mswati III rules as sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch..

Wilder Tayler, ICJ’s Secretary General, said, ‘The consequences of this arbitrary action against Thulani Maseko have not only violated his rights and exacted a heavy personal toll, but have also highlighted the rule of law deficit in Swaziland. Thulani Maseko has been denied his right to express an opinion on public affairs and the administration of justice, guaranteed under international law and affirmed in the UN Basic principles on the Role of lawyers.’

Thulani Maseko and journalist Bheki Makhubu were charged with two counts of contempt of court emanating from articles published in the Nation in February and March 2014, in which they questioned circumstances surrounding the arrest of a government vehicle inspector.

They were sentenced to two years of imprisonment, without the alternative option of a fine at the end of a trial largely condemned by leading international rights groups as unfair and not complying with international standards on the right to a fair trial.

In a statement the ICJ said, ‘Some of the fair trial guarantees that have been breached, according to the legal petition filed with the UNGWAD, include the right to be tried by an independent and impartial tribunal; right to a public hearing; right to a legal counsel; right to the presumption of innocence; right to bail; and right to protection of the law.’

Marc Gottridge, partner at Hogan Lovells, said,‘The use of contempt of court proceedings to suppress the right to freedom of expression is a violation of international human rights law. The right to freedom of expression is guaranteed in the Swazi constitution and international law, including treaties to which Swaziland is a party.

‘The general failings of the Swazi judiciary with respect to independence and impartiality makes it reasonable to conclude that there cannot be an effective domestic remedy for Thulani Maseko.’

See also