UNITED NATIONS A General Assembly Distr. GENERAL A/HRC/4/25/Add.1 5 April 2007 ENGLISH/FRENCH/SPANISH Human Rights Council Fourth session Agenda item 2 IMPLEMENTATION OF GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION 60/251 OF 15 MARCH 2006 ENTITLED “HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL” Report of the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, Leandro Despouy Addendum Situations in specific countries or territories∗ ∗The present document is being circulated in the languages of submission only as it greatly exceeds the page limitations imposed by the relevant General Assembly resolutions. GE.07-12812 A/HRC/4/25/Add.1 Page 2 CONTENTS Paragraphs Page I. INTRODUCTION 1-7 4-6 II. STATISTICAL DATA 8 7-9 Figure 1. Thematic issues addressed in allegations brought to the Special Rapporteur’s attention and transmitted to Governments in 2006 Figure 2. Type of communication sent to Governments by the Special Rapporteur in 2006 Figure 3. Communication sent by the Special Rapporteur and Governments replies received in 2006 Figure 4. Communication sent by the Special Rapporteur and Governments replies received in the past 3 years Figure 5. Communication sent to Governments by the Special Rapporteur in 2006 by region Figure 6. Communication sent to Governments by the Special Rapporteur in 2006 by gender III. SUMMARY OF CASES TRANSMITTED AND 9-402 10-219 REPLIES RECEIVED Afghanistan 9-16 10-13 Algeria 17-24 13-18 Argentina 25-33 18-26 Australia 34-38 26-29 Azerbaijan 39-41 29-31 Bahrain 42-45 31-33 Bangladesh 46-53 33-39 Belarus 54-57 39-41 Brazil 58-63 41-43 Cambodia 64-66 43-44 Central African Republic 67-69 44-45 Chad 70-72 45-46 Chile 73-76 46-48 China 77-102 49-67 Colombia 103-109 67-72 Cuba 110-113 72-73 Czech Republic 114-116 73-74 Democratic Republic of the Congo 117-122 74-77 Ecuador 123-128 77-82 Egypt 129-142 82-90 Ethiopia 143-147 90-93 Gambia 148-150 93-95 Georgia 151-153 95-96 Germany 154-160 96-100 Greece 161-163 100-101 Guatemala 164-166 101-102 A/HRC/4/25/Add.1 Page 3 Honduras 167-170 102-104 India 171-174 104-105 Indonesia 175-178 105-107 Iran (Islamic Republic of) 179-200 107-119 Iraq 201-209 119-124 Israel 210-219 124-129 Kazakhstan 220-224 129-131 Kyrgyzstan 225-229 131-134 Liberia 230-232 134-135 Malaysia 233-235 135-135 Mexico 236-256 135-146 Moldova 257-261 146-149 Morocco 262-264 149-150 Myanmar 265-272 150-155 Nepal 273-285 155-159 Pakistan 281-285 159-160 Paraguay 286-288 160-161 Peru 289-291 161-162 Philippines 292-297 162-165 Russian Federation 298-315 165-176 Saudi Arabia 316-318 176-176 Serbia 319-321 176-177 Sierra Leone 322-324 177-178 Singapore 325-331 178-182 Sri Lanka 332-334 182-183 Sudan 335-340 183-186 Syrian Arab Republic 341-351 186-191 Tajikistan 352-354 191-192 Thailand 355-358 192-194 Tunisia 359-369 194-200 Turkey 370-374 200-201 United Arab Emirates 375-378 201-203 United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland 379-380 203-206 United States of America 381-386 206-211 Uzbekistan 387-394 211-216 Yemen 395-398 216-217 Zimbabwe 399-402 217-219 A/HRC/4/25/Add.1 Page 4 I. INTRODUCTION 1. The present report supplements the main report submitted by the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers to the Human Rights Council. It reflects specific situations alleged to be affecting the independence of the judiciary or violating the right to a fair trial in 63 countries. Further, it presents any replies received from the Government of the country concerned in response to specific allegations together with the Special Rapporteur’s comments and observations. Readers will thus find in it: (a) Summaries of the urgent appeals and allegation letters transmitted by the Special Rapporteur to governmental authorities between 1 January 2006 and 15 January 2007, and of press releases issued during the same reporting period. In this connection, the Special Rapporteur wishes to emphasize that the communications presented in the report exclusively reflect allegations he received and subsequently acted upon. Where information was insufficient and could not be supplemented, or where the information received was outside the mandate, the Special Rapporteur was not in a position to act. Hence such allegations were not included in the report; (b) Summaries of the replies received from several States concerned between 1 January 2006 and 15 January 2007. In certain instances, the Government reply was obtained late and referred to allegations that were presented in the previous report concerning the year 2005 or even earlier. On the other hand, it may be noted that certain responses to urgent appeals or allegation letters sent during the reporting period, and for which the Special Rapporteur wishes to thank the Governments, could not be included in the report owing to the fact that they were either not translated in time or received after 15 January 2007. To the Special Rapporteur’s regret, they will therefore be reflected only in next year’s report. Finally, due to restrictions on the length of the report, the Special Rapporteur has been obliged to summarize the details of all correspondence sent and received. As a result, requests from Governments to publish their replies in their totality could regrettably not be accommodated; (c) Observations or specific comments by the Special Rapporteur. 2. The report also includes six tables of statistical data so as to help the Human Rights Council to have an overview of developments in 2006 and the past three years. 3. As may be seen from the tables, action has mainly been taken in the form of urgent action, and this in conjunction with other special rapporteurs. This reflects not only a personal choice of the Special Rapporteur to work in close collaboration with other special rapporteurs and aimed at strengthening the functioning and impact of the special procedures, but also the fact that it is far from uncommon that situations affecting the judiciary occur in contexts in which other democratic institutions are also at risk, or where a wide range of human rights are being violated such as the right to life, the right not to be subjected to torture and ill-treatment, the right to freedom of expression, as well as the specific rights of women, indigenous peoples or minorities. A/HRC/4/25/Add.1 Page 5 4. The Special Rapporteur notes that communications have been sent to 63 Member States of all regions of the world. Furthermore, he highlights that the type of allegations covers a wide range of subjects. It should be noted, however, that over 40 per cent of the communication sent concern allegations related to threats against lawyers. In addition, about 11 per cent of communications have been sent with respect to alleged violations of the right to choose one’s own lawyer, and similarly, about 11 per cent on reported violations of the freedom of expression of lawyers. A significant percentage (about 10 per cent) concerned alleged violations of the right to have access to the courts and a fair trial. 5. The Special Rapporteur points out that, as compared to 2005, the number of communications sent to Governments has increased by 67 per cent. Given this significant increase, fears are expressed with respect to the increasing percentage of wide-ranging assaults on the independence of judges and lawyers around the world. These facts do not only prove the weakening of the judiciary as an institution, but also reflect direct attacks on judges and lawyers, all of which result in significant violations of the right to due process and to a fair trial. The Special Rapporteur further attributes this increase to the fact that more people are aware of the procedure and the international standards guiding his mandate. However, the significant low percentage of female individuals on behalf of whom the Special Rapporteur was able to receive information and send communications is of serious concern to him. Hence, he is concerned about the lack of reporting on the situation of women and the resulting diminished protection of their human rights. 6. At the same time, the Special Rapporteur wishes to point out that, as compared to previous years, he has enjoyed increased cooperation on the part of Governments. In fact, 34 States of the 63 States referred to in this report have provided him with a substantive reply to his communications. Most of these States have offered detailed substantive information on the allegations received. The Special Rapporteur welcomes and further encourages cooperation from the Governments that have provided replies to his communications. The Special Rapporteur underlines that it is crucial that Governments share their views on the allegations received with him. He highlights his preoccupation in relation to the proportion of specific allegations of serious human rights violations that remain unanswered. The Special Rapporteur invites those States which are lagging behind to avoid situations in which they do not offer any form of substantive reply to allegations transmitted to them. Fearing that such lack of reply may expose these States to various interpretations ranging from administrative negligence to an admission by omission of the allegation relayed to them, he urges them to provide precise and detailed answers at the earliest possible date. 7. The Special Rapporteur trusts that the situation described above demonstrates the relevance of the existence and the concrete impact of this special procedure which, in his view, should definitely be strengthened in the course of the review of mandates by the Human Rights Council.