The European Commission, Parliament and Council have this month reached agreement on the text of a Directive which will guarantee the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and to communicate upon arrest. Fair Trials International is pleased that this measure has been agreed as we, along with other international NGOs, have campaigned hard to ensure that basic defence rights are better guaranteed across Europe. If suspects cannot access a lawyer, it is very difficult, if not impossible, for them to prepare a defence and therefore to receive a fair trial.

Libby Clarke, Fair Trials International’s Head of Law Reform, said:

“We are delighted that, after lengthy and complex negotiations, all parties have reached agreement on this important Directive. However, there is still much to be done to improve defence rights in Europe, including the effective implementation of the first three procedural rights directives and the introduction of crucial new measures relating to the provision of legal aid and the guarantee of specific protections for vulnerable suspects.”

The Directive is the latest right agreed from the Procedural Defence Rights Roadmap, which was set out under the Stockholm Programme. Fair Trials International is holding a series of meetings with legal practitioners from across Europe to (i) learn about how the Directives adopted under the Roadmap will help to address fair trial issues in those countries, and (ii) make recommendations for effective implementation, without which the new laws will make little difference in practice. Read a communiqué from our recent meeting of experts from Austria, Bulgaria, Germany, Hungary and Romania here.

For more information please contact Fair Trials International on +44 (0)20 7822 2370 or +44 (0)7950 849 851

Notes to editors

1. Key elements of the new proposed right: The text of the new Directive has not yet been made publicly available, so the detail of the safeguards it offers cannot yet be fully analysed. The next step, however, will be to make sure that the Directive is properly implemented so as to provide effective access to a lawyer to those who are arrested or subjected to police questioning. In April 2013, Fair Trials International, along with national and international NGOs working on justice and human rights, together with the European Criminal Bar Association (ECBA), published a joint statement advocating the need for the Directive to uphold and develop existing international human rights standards in this area.

2. Defence rights – why the EU must protect them: The right to a fair trial and defence are set out in Articles 47 and 48 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and in Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Under Article 82(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the EU can adopt measures to strengthen the rights of EU citizens, in line with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, and to facilitate the mutual recognition of judicial decisions and improve police and judicial cooperation on criminal matters having a cross border nature. European Member States today cooperate more than ever before in justice matters. This means they must be able to trust in the fairness of each other’s justice systems; equally, people facing charges in Europe must be confident they will be treated fairly, wherever they are charged. This is, unfortunately, a long way from reality. For trust to be established, basic defence rights must be guaranteed by the legal systems of every single Member State and be enforceable by nationals and non-nationals alike. Previous attempts to create these safeguards failed in 2007 when 6 countries (including the UK, Ireland and Poland) vetoed a Commission proposal.

3. Other defence rights under the Stockholm Programme: The “Stockholm Programme” is the five year legislative programme for EU Justice and Home Affairs, adopted in December 2009. It provides the basis for EU legislation on justice matters between 2010 and 2014 and sets out the Procedural Rights Roadmap. The first law under the Roadmap, guaranteeing the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings, was passed in 2010 and must be implemented into the law of all Member States by October 2013. The second Directive, which was adopted in May 2012, will ensure that suspects are provided with certain information during criminal proceedings, including a ‘Letter of Rights’ on arrest and granted access to the case file to help them prepare an effective defence. To read our briefings and case studies showing why Europe must act to protect these rights, click here.

4. The Directive on access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and on the right to communicate upon arrest: This is the third measure under the procedural rights Roadmap which was adopted four years ago to deliver stronger fair trial rights across Europe. The first law guarantees the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings and the second will ensure that suspects are provided with certain information during criminal proceedings, including a ‘Letter of Rights’ on arrest, and granted access to the case file to help them prepare an effective defence.

The next measure under the Roadmap, which is intended to ensure that legal aid is granted to those who cannot afford to pay for their lawyer, will also be a vital counterpart to the new Directive as, without adequate access to legal aid, the right of access to a lawyer is unlikely to make a significant difference in practice for many involved in criminal proceedings. We are expecting the European Commission to publish a proposal in this area later this year.  Fair Trials International has highlighted the problems with the practical operation of legal aid in the EU in a report which you can read here.

5. Fair Trials International’s Justice in Europe campaign: We have long campaigned for legislation at EU level on basic defence rights, because it is the only way to require Member States to deliver on their fair trial obligations, both to nationals and non-nationals. We use the real-life experiences of the people we assist to show the need for these measures. For more information on our Justice in Europe campaign, click here.

The post Fair Trials Welcomes Directive on Access to a Lawyer appeared first on Fair Trials.

Chief Executive Jago Russell is quoted “Interpol is a valuable tool in the fight against serious crime, but its ‘wanted’ alerts have the potential to deprive people of their liberty and destroy their reputations. With 190 member countries, some of them known human rights abusers and notoriously corrupt, Interpol must put in place effective systems to prevent its global networks being misused.”

The post Browder case reignites claims over ‘misuse’ of Interpol appeared first on Fair Trials.

Having arrived safely in the EU, Petr was given asylum as a political refugee. Russia, though, did not give up. Instead, it used Interpol (the world’s largest international policing organisation) to circulate a “wanted” alert against Petr to police forces across Europe. Petr stands charged with “hooliganism” by prosecutors in Russia, a vague offence prohibiting public disorder “which expresses patent contempt for society”. Russia’s use of the offence became the subject of international criticism after it was used to convict members of the punk band Pussy Riot for staging a public performance of an anti-Putin song in a Church in Moscow in February 2012.

The post Petr Silaev and the Abuse of Interpol appeared first on Fair Trials.

It may be more difficult for him to travel to attend other similar events following reports that Russian authorities, angered by his campaign, are now pursuing him through Interpol, the international police co-operation organisation.

The post EU should act on political abuse of Interpol appeared first on Fair Trials.

Petr’s case highlights the fact that the INTERPOL policing network is being used against political opponents, human rights campaigners, journalists and business and abused by members, some of whom are known human rights abusers and notoriously corrupt.

The post Is Interpol fighting for truth and justice, or helping the villains? appeared first on Fair Trials.

Текст пресс-релиза на русском языке см. Ниже

Vea la versión española a continuación

Fair Trials has today called on INTERPOL to prevent its global policing network being used to seek the arrest and extradition of Russian anti-fascist campaigner, Petr Silaev, in relation to his involvement in demonstration against a controversial new motorway development through the Khimki Forest outside Moscow. Those campaigning against this have been subject to intimidation and violence, with one man, local journalist Mikhail Beketov, beaten so severely he had to have several fingers and a leg amputated and recently died as a result of his injuries. Petr is one of many anti-fascists targeted in a widespread police crackdown following the demonstration. He is wanted for “hooliganism”, an offence widely misused in Russia including against the punk band “Pussy Riot”.

Petr escaped Russia and was recognised as a political refugee in the EU (by Finland). Despite this, Russia was able to use INTERPOL to ask countries across the globe to arrest and extradite Petr. Due to this INTERPOL alert, Petr was arrested and detained in Spain and threatened with extradition to Russia. After a long legal battle, Spain recognised that Petr was being prosecuted for his political opinions and refused to extradite him but Petr continues to live under the shadow of a politically-motivated Russian arrest warrant circulated across the globe through INTERPOL.

Jago Russell, Chief Executive of Fair Trials International, said:

“Petr thought he was safe when he made it to the EU but INTERPOL’s global policing network has allowed Russia to track him down and continue its persecution. INTERPOL must do more to weed out political cases like this and should amend its records to allow Petr to get on with his life.”

Petr’s case is one of many brought to Fair Trials´ attention where INTERPOL’s systems have been abused, including by Russia, Indonesia, Venezuela, Algeria and Sri Lanka. Fair Trials is calling for basic improvements to the way INTERPOL operates to weed out abuses and to give people like Petr access to an independent, fair and transparent process to challenge the use of INTERPOL’s systems.

For more information please contact Fair Trials International on +44 (0)20 7822 2370 or +44 (0)7950 849 851

Notes to Editors

1. Fair Trials International is a human rights charity which works for effective defence of the right to a fair trial according to recognised international standards.

2. Petr Silaev is a Russian anti-fascist activist from Moscow. In 2010 he took part in a demonstration against controversial plans for a new motorway through the Khimki forest. Following the demonstration, a widespread police crackdown led to the arrest of known anti-fascist activists across Moscow. Fearing he would be targeted, Petr fled Russia and was recognised as a political refugee in Finland. In August 2012, however, he was arrested in Spain on the basis of a request circulated by Moscow prosecutors using INTERPOL’s channels and was detained for eight days in a high-security prison. The Russian authorities requested his extradition from Spain to face trial for an offence of ‘hooliganism’. In February 2013, the Spanish court refused Petr’s extradition on the basis that he was being prosecuted on account of his political opinions. Click here to read more about Petr’s case and watch him speaking about his ordeal.

3. ‘Hooliganism’ is defined by Article 213 of the Russian Criminal Code as ‘a gross violation of the public order which expresses patent contempt for society’. Its enforcement by Russian prosecutors and courts became the subject of international criticism after members of the punk band Pussy Riot were convicted of hooliganism and sentenced to two years’ imprisonment for staging a public performance of an anti-Putin song in a Church in Moscow in February 2012.

4. Fair Trials has today applied to the “Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files” which is a data protection panel within INTERPOL charged with monitoring INTERPOL’s compliance with its rules. We have argued that information on Petr should be deleted from INTERPOL’s systems because, according to its own constitution, INTERPOL must not “undertake any intervention or activities of a political, religious, racial or military character”. To read the application, click here. The Commission’s procedures do not involve oral hearings and can take years to reach a conclusion. It does not issue reasoned decisions. It is not possible to challenge abuses of INTERPOL’s systems in any court in the world.

5. INTERPOL is the second largest international organisation, after the United Nations, with 190 member countries and an annual budget of over €60 million. One of its roles is to enable police forces across the globe to exchange information, including the distribution of information seeking the arrest of wanted people for the purposes of extradition. This is done through “diffusions” and “red notices” and over 20,000 of these are issued each year and circulated across the globe. Each carries with it the potential to deprive people of their liberty and reputation. For more information on red notices and Interpol, click here.

6. Some of INTERPOL’s 190 member countries are known human rights abusers and notoriously corrupt, but Interpol has no effective mechanisms to prevent countries, or even individual prosecutors, abusing its systems. As a result, even though most red notices may be perfectly valid, abuses of INTERPOL are affecting human rights campaigners, journalists and businessmen. Other cases include:

- Benny Wenda, a West Papuan freedom fighter who escaped from prison in Indonesia and was granted asylum as a political refugee in the UK. Indonesia obtained a red notice based on the same politically-motivated charges he had fled, and had the notice published on
INTERPOL’s website, tarnishing the image of Benny and his campaign. Further to an application by Fair Trials International, INTERPOL deleted the red notice in July 2012.
- Napoleon Gómez, a trade union leader from Mexico against whom prosecutors issued over ten arrest warrants, all based on the same allegations, all of which were dismissed by national courts. Despite this, the Mexican authorities maintained a red notice in place for six years. INTERPOL eventually deleted the red notice in March 2013.

7. Fair Trials is calling for reforms to INTERPOL to protect against abuse and allow redress:
- First, changes so INTERPOL can identify red notices requested by countries that would be abusive, incomplete or inaccurate. In recent years Interpol has, sadly, made it easier for countries to avoid its limited internal controls.
- Secondly, an effective and independent body must be created to give people a fair chance to challenge the use of Interpol’s systems against them. This must follow basic rules of due process, be transparent and give reasons for its decisions.

PRESS RELEASE – RUSSIAN ANTI-FASCIST PERSECUTED THROUGH INTERPOL FOR “HOOLIGANISM”

РОССИЙСКИЙ АНТИФАШИСТ ПРЕСЛЕДУЕТСЯ ПО КАНАЛАМ ИНТЕРПОЛА ЗА «ХУЛИГАНСТВО»

ANTIFASCISTA RUSO PERSEGUIDO POR “GAMBERRISMO” A TRAVÉS DE INTERPOL

The post Russian Anti-Fascist Persecuted Through INTERPOL For “Hooliganism” appeared first on Fair Trials.

On Monday 18^th March, the UK Parliament will debate much-needed reforms to the country’s extradition laws. The amendments, part of the Crime and Courts Bill, would introduce safeguards to reduce the injustice caused by Europe’s fast-track extradition system, the European Arrest Warrant.

Fair Trials International’s Chief Executive, Jago Russell, said:

“After countless cases of injustice and years of talk about change, Parliament now has a chance to act to put justice and fairness back into our extradition laws. Let’s hope MPs don’t let this opportunity slip through their fingers.”

Fair Trials International has long campaigned for safeguards against unjust extradition and reform has been backed by a number of inquiries and during debates in Parliament. In response, the UK Government has proposed two limited changes in the Crime and Courts (outlined below) but these do not go far enough and will do little to prevent future cases of injustice.

Additional amendments have now been tabled, including reforms to the European Arrest Warrant which resulted in over 900 extraditions from the UK in 2011. Fair Trials International has highlighted serious cases of injustice under this system (below). The UK Government has announced that it is working with other EU countries to seek reform of the Warrant at EU level. There are, however, changes that could be made by the UK Parliament to prevent cases of injustice.

For more information please contact Fair Trials International on +44 (0)20 7822 2370 or +44 (0)7950 849 851

Download this press release here

Notes to Editors

1. Fair Trials International is a human rights charity that provides assistance to people arrested in a country other than their own and campaigns for reform to fight the underlying causes of injustice in cross-border cases.

2. We have long called for reform of the UK’s extradition laws and are also campaigning for reform of the European Arrest Warrant at EU level. Numerous reviews, inquiries and debates in Parliament have backed the case for sensible reform, including the Scott Baker Panel’s review and Parliament’s Joint Committee on Human Rights inquiry and Home Affairs Committee.

3. The Crime and Courts Bill will go through Report Stage in the House of Commons on 13 and 18 March 2013. The Government has introduced amendments to: (A) remove the Home Secretary’s power to refuse extradition on human rights grounds (used in the case of Gary McKinnon); and (B) introduce a power for courts to block extradition on forum grounds when it is not in the interests of justice for another country to prosecute a crime with close links to the UK. As currently drafted the forum amendment is likely to have very little impact in practice.

4. Additional amendments, were tabled on 5 March 2013. They amend the Extradition Act 2003 by: (i) amending the Government’s proposed forum bar ; and (ii) introducing new clauses to improve safeguards in European Arrest Warrant cases. These Arrest Warrant changes are as follows:

a. No extradition until a case is trial ready to prevent the many cases of premature extradition                             currently blighting the system.

Andrew Symeou,  for example, although cleared of any wrong-doing, was extradited to Greece two years before his trial was due to start and spent a year in appalling prison conditions.

b. Increase the fixed one-week deadline to appeal against extradition under an EAW to 14 days and allow courts to extend the deadline in the interests of justice, so that injustices caused by inflexibility in the current system are avoided.

Garry Mann for example, was denied an appeal against the decision to extradite him to Portugal to serve a sentence imposed after a grossly unfair trial as his first team of lawyers missed the deadline by less than 24 hours.

c. Allow courts to seek further information in an EAW case where there is suspicion of mistaken identity.

Edmond Arapi was ordered to be extradited to Italy to serve a sixteen year sentence for a murder he could not have committed (he was in the UK at the time and had never been to the Italian city it happened in). There was no power for the UK courts to highlight this and ask Italian prosecutors to look again.

5. The European Arrest Warrant is a fast-track system for surrendering people from one EU country to another to face trial or serve a prison sentence. It has removed many of the traditional safeguards in the extradition process. If a court in one country demands a person’s arrest and extradition, courts and police in other countries must act on it. We have called for reform to end the use of EAW’s for trivial offences and to provide better protection of suspects’ fundamental rights. Some changes will require reform at EU level but some can also be achieved domestically.

6. Fair Trials International has called for an effective forum bar to be introduced to enable courts to block extradition when it is not in the interests of justice. We have serious concerns that the clauses tabled by the Government do not, as drafted, provide a sufficient safeguard against unjust extradition. See our briefing to the Public Bill Committee on the forum bar.

The post Parliament Finally Given Chance to Make UK Extradition Laws Fairer appeared first on Fair Trials.

Numerous defendants in Warsaw are unrepresented in pre-trial detention hearings according to a group of experts brought together by Fair Trials International.  The failure to provide adequate representation and the inability of the Polish Courts to thoroughly review pre-trial motions is resulting in the unnecessary detention of many individuals.

Fair Trials International, in conjunction with Polish criminal justice experts, is calling for reforms to the current practices of pre-trial detention in Poland. Excessive use of pre-trial detention can have a devastating effect on defendants, who may lose their job and be restricted from seeing family or friends despite not having been convicted of any crime.

A report released this week illustrates the need for reforms to the widespread and often unwarranted practice of pre-trial detention. The report contains the Fair Trials International Local Expert Group’s legal and policy recommendations for the Polish Government and Court systems. The Local Expert Group calls attention to the fact, while Polish laws comply with international standards in relation to pre-trial detention, in practice detention is the general rule rather than the exception and alternatives are rarely used by the courts.  This could be easily remedied with increased training for judges and lawyers who are often unaware of EU standards and best practices on pre-trial detention.

Jago Russell, Chief Executive at Fair Trials International, said:

“Our own experience of helping people detained in Poland – as well as the input of our legal networks – has long raised concerns about the over-use of pre-trial detention in Poland. This new report provides a clearer understanding of the causes of excessive pre-trial detention and once again highlights the need for the EU to take action in this area.”

Every year Fair Trials International helps hundreds of people across Europe defend their right to a fair trial. Unjustified pre-trial detention is an infringement of that right and Fair Trials International encourages Polish judges, prosecutors and law makers to take steps to address the violations that occur on a daily basis. A number of significant legal reforms are underway in Poland which, if implemented, should address some of the problems with the pre-trial detention system. We welcome these changes but more work is needed to change the practice in the Polish court system to ensure that pre-trial motions are properly reviewed, defendants have suitable representation, and all possible alternatives to detention are considered. 

For more information please contact Fair Trials International on +44 (0)20 7822 2370 or +44 (0)7950 849 851

The post Fair Trials Publishes Communiqué on Pre-Trial Detention appeared first on Fair Trials.

The European Court of Justice’s Grand Chamber has ruled that the Charter of Fundamental Rights does not allow refusal to execute a European Arrest Warrant (EAW) on the basis that the person was not heard by the issuing authority.

The post Extradition injustice remains despite European ruling in Radu appeared first on Fair Trials.

Extradition has an enormous impact on suspects’ lives and there is growing awareness that additional safeguards are needed to ensure that effective extradition laws also adequately protect basic human rights. At Fair Trials International we regularly see the devastating effects of extradition and have campaigned for several simple changes to the extradition laws in the UK and across Europe that would build vital safeguards into the system as well as saving costs.

The post UK’s missed opportunity on extradition reform appeared first on Fair Trials.