Through JustGiving, you can now make a small donation to ensure that Chanlina, a 13 year-old girl currently detained at a prison in Cambodia, is released and able to go back to school. JustGiving is a global social platform for giving that makes a real difference to causes everywhere.

Despite her young age, Chanlina has currently spent over eight months in a cell along with 87 other prisoners awaiting trial for a crime that she did not commit. In Cambodia, the minimum age for detention is 14 years old, however, since Chanlina is adopted and has no birth certificate to establish her true age, she is being charged as an adult. She passes each day in her cell with no friends, little food, no schooling for her illiteracy, and “feels as if [she] has no purpose”.

After meeting with Chanlina and her adopted mother, IBJ Cambodia’s country manager Ouk Vandeth decided to represent Chanlina on a pro bono basis. Due to the continued postponement of her trial date, Chanlina continues to sleep alone on little more than a plastic bag spread out on the concrete floor of her crowded cell.

Just a small donation can change Chanlina’s life. With your support, we can get Chanlina out of prison, reunite her with her desperate mother, and get her back to school.

Visit JustGiving and donate now.

Some names have been changed to protect privacy.

After Harshi Perera received her law degree from the Open University of Sri Lanka in 2008 with a specialization in human rights, she began formally assisting Janasansadaya (JS) by responding to human rights violations and cases. She developed a particular passion advocating for the rights of children and women, perceiving these groups as some of the most vulnerable in Sri Lanka. Now 2010 Asia JusticeMakers Fellow Harshi Perera reflects on the competition and how far she’s come.

H.M. Harshi Chitrangi Perera

2010 Asia JusticeMakers Fellow, Sri Lanka

August 29, 2014

What made you apply for IBJ’s JusticeMakers Competition?

{To} work for another human being and make a difference. We needed a grant to do this.

What were some of the initial challenges you faced in implementing your work?

 The malpractices and delays in justice system, along with the {the lack of} professionals attached to it, proved difficult.  Criticism from the media when trying to give bail to a LTTE suspect also caused hindrances.

What were you able to achieve with your grant of $5,000?

What I achieved was more valuable than $5,000. I successfully fulfilled the goal, releasing five women pre-trial detainees from the Welikada Female Prison Ward.  One woman was an eight year pre-trial detainee, while another woman was released with her baby. We were able to help two other women, one whom had been remanded on fabrication of charge by the police and another woman who is a rape survivor whom had been remanded for not appearing before the court for five years.

What have you gained from joining the international community of JusticeMakers Fellows?

 Experience and knowledge.

As a recipient of IBJ’s JusticeMakers Competition, what advice would you give to those looking to apply?

Work Hard. Have a dream of what you are going to achieve. Work double than the grant of $5,000. Work to raise voices instead of money.

The main goal was to help legal aid lawyers to find solutions to unnecessary and long detentions in police and judicial custody of undertrial people. The course attempts to «… refine courtroom practices towards reaching the high goal of rule of law». The focus was on impacts of incarceration on the prisoner, by discussing and lecturing on due process treatment, strengthening legal aid services, and effective legal interventions by advocates. With the Indian Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) as its starting point, the course aimed to increase the lawyers’ procedural knowledge on fair trial, minimizing pre-trial detention, and other crucial parts of legal administration.

Some of the female lawyers discussing.

The welcome address was held by Secretary in DLSA, Mr. Tan Singh Charan. Thereafter, Ms. Sana Das, Coordinator in CHRI, read out a message from Hon’ble Justice Ajay Rastogi, Chairperson of Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority (RSLSA), which was also part of the reading material handed out to the participants. Mr. Tan Singh Charan then started the first session of the workshop by talking about the importance of providing the accused with a legal aid lawyer. He was followed by Hon’ble Justice Mr Govind Mathur, Judge Rajasthan High Court & Chairman of Rajasthan High Court Legal Services Committee, who emphasized more about various methodology to improve court and legal aid practices to prevent unnecessary detention. Among other things he referred to the Cr.P.C. section 437, which states in what situations bail may be taken in case of non-bailable offenses, and section 49 and 50, which states that (”The arrested person shall not be subjected to more restraint than is necessary to prevent his escape” and that a “person arrested (is) to be informed of grounds of arrest and of right to bail”.

One of the speakers was Hon’ble Mr. Justice Gobind Mathur, Judge Rajasthan High Court.

Mr. R. K. Saxena, former Inspector General, Rajasthan Prisons and Honorary Consultant with CHRI also contributed to the session, who talked about alternatives to imprisonment in bailable and non-bailable offenses. The participants questions and comments were effectively answered and heard. Mr. Saxena also pointed out how the inequality before law contradicts with the ideal of equality before the law, and referred to undersection 39A in the Indian Constitution, which deals with equal justice and free legal aid. It claims that:

”The State shall secure that the operation of the legal system promotes justice, on a basis of equal opportunity, and shall, in particular, provide free legal aid, by suitable legislation or schemes or in any other way, to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities.”

Mr. R.K. Saxena sharing his knowledge and experience.

The day continued with an introduction of the training by Mr. Ajay Verma, Advocate  representing IBJ India. He talked about general issues lawyers are facing, and screened a movie from the client-lawyer role play held in Jodhpur Central Jail 04th-06th October. This was followed by an active and fruitful discussion from both sides on issues regarding client-lawyer relationship, speedy trial and pre-trial justice.

Day 2 of the workshop begun with all of the lawyers introduced themselves, their name, where they are practicing and for how many years they have been practicing. Ajay Verma held a session on illegalities in the criminal justice system and also focused on prisoners’ rights. Thereafter, an interactive game was played,  led by Ms. Abha Joshi, Advocate and Ms. Sugandha Shankar, CHRI. The lawyers were asked about which problems they themselves had been facing in prison. The last session of the day was led by Ms. Abha Joshi, and followed by a panel discussion on arrest, and especially section 41 in the Cr.P.C. which states when the police may arrest without warrant.

Teamwork

On the third and last day of the workshop, the first session was led by Ms. Abha Joshi on the topic of arrest, bail and remand, bailable offenses and cognizable and non-cognizable offenses, supplemented with Ajay Verma and the rest of the panels contributions and points. In her presentation, Ms. Abha Joshi focused on sections 167 Cr.P.C., “Procedure when investigation cannot be completed in twenty four hours”, Section 70,  which deals with forms of warrants of arrest and duration, section 41, regarding arrest of persons, and sections 43, 44, and 55, regarding procedures of arrest. In the following session the game «my favourite lawyer, my favourite client» was played. Then, some time was spent on discussing legal aid solutions, for example legal aid developments and ethics of the advocates profession.

Answering questions, from left to right: Mr. Ajay Verma, Mr. Bora, Mr. Tan Singh, Mr. R.K. Saxena.

Overall the training was successful, and the participants expressed satisfaction over the panel and the topics in focus. They also requested more senior lawyers to speak in future events, a feedback we appreciate and will follow up. It is important to underline the importance of these kind of programs as legal aid is an important part of the administration of justice, and we are looking forward to more fruitful lawyer trainings in the near future.

Some of the longterm convicts that participated in the workshop.

From the 04^th to the 06^th of October, IBJ India jointly conducted a three-day para-legal training in Jodhpur, Rajasthan. The training was conducted in collaboration with CHRI (Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative), State Legal Service Authority (Rajasthan), and District Legal Service Authority (Jodhpur).The overall goal of this workshop was to train longterm convicts in basic legal issues and procedures, especially relating to pre-trial detention and speedy trial. When trained properly, longterm convicts become in-house legal resources, and they are therefore potential significant resources in jail administration. Their knowledge as para-legals enables them to spread legal awareness and to assist undertrial and freshcomer prisoners in their jail.

Mr. Ajay Verma talks to one of the convict.

The workshop was titled Saksham Legal Capacity Building Workshop, a name capturing the essence of its goal in the word “Saksham”, translated to “capable” in English. We gathered about 20 literate longterm convicts in the hall of the prison complex in Jodhpur Central Jail. The prisoners participated actively in the sessions and many of them showed a big potential to be future para-legals in the jail. “A 72 years old man serving a lifetime sentence, came up to me and said that this training was the definite highlight of his 22 years of imprisonment. This is my definite most memorable moment of the workshop”, Said Mr. Ajay Verma, Advocate & Fellow IBJ India.

Friday the 04^th of October was the first day of the workshop and was kicked off with an interactive session, in which the convicts’ knowledge about issues like prisoners’ rights and the right to an effective and speedy trial was mapped. As our previous experience from these kinds of events shows, the inmates usually do not have basic knowledge on these issues. The Superintendent of the Jail, Shri Rakesh Moham, talked about the role of para-legals and prison officers in prison management and reform. Mr. Ajay Verma then talked about IBJ’s work with prisons. The movie “Bol Bosanto” was screened, and followed up with a discussion on the movie’s topic, namely: What is law?

Excercise on client-lawyer relationship made the convicts have fun.

Day one continued with an interactive session, conducted by Mr. Verma (IBJ India) and Mr. Raja Bagga (CHRI). They explained the rights available during trial, and made the convicts share their own experiences. Certain images of court-,policestation-, and jailscenes were shown, and the inmates were asked to explain what they were seeing and to share their own stories with the group. Further, Mr. Verma led a session on the importance of a good client-lawyer relationship. This was done by roleplay exercises, for example, half of the convicts were acting clients and the other half were acting lawyers. They used their own experiences to argue their cases. This activity was conducted to find out what the convicts have gone through and what problems they have faced with their lawyers, problems it is less likely that they would have shared face to face with them. Many convicts do not even talk with their lawyers, which often just take their papers without interacting any further with their client. The activity also made the convicts laugh and have some fun in a, at times, heated discussion between the clients and the lawyers.

Excercise on client-lawyer relationship made the convicts have fun.

The next session on Avadhik Samiksha Samiti was chaired by Shri Mukish, Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. Mr. Rakesh Mohan, Superintendent, Jodhpur Prison was also present as co panelist as both persons are ex-officio representatives of the Periodic Review Committee (PRC). The Committee was created in 1979 with the mandate to ensure that the undertrials’ right to freedom is properly ensured. The Committee is supposed to frequently review the situation of every prisoner awaiting trial. It is thought that giving the para-legals information about the PRC will help them understand their larger role in the delivery of justice for other prisoners and explain to them how they in their role as para-legals can assist in strengthening the Committee.        

Written excercises were a significant part of the workshop

The second day was kicked off with an open session, where the convicts came forward and requested Mr. Verma from IBJ India to listen to and take up their cases. The morning session  focused on bail, plea-bargaining, appeal and parole. Exercises were done to equip the para-legals in drafting bail applications, plea bargaining applications, parole and appeals. The convicts were given casestories, and asked to draft bail applications, which were reviewed in plural. Other topics covered on the second day were eligibity, referral authorities and the following-up process.

On the third and last day of the paralegal training, the movie “Pehel” was screened followed by a discussion. The aim was to visualize the structures that would be needed for effective functioning of paralegal work in Jodhpur Central Jail. Also, some time was devoted to talking about bailable offences, under sections 107 and 151 in the Indian Criminal Procedure Code (Cr. P.C.). Under Section 436 states that if a person is not able to furnish bail for a period of one week, and he does not have a surety, according to the section he is supposed to be released on furnishing a personal bond. The objective of the workshop was to train longterm convicts in a way so that their potential resources in jail administration are enabled. The workshop focused on the difficulties faced by those held in pre-trial detention and stressed how longterm convicts can assist them, while at the same time it helped the convicts to gain insight into their own legal rights. We have a very good relationship with the prison authorities in Jodhpur Central Jail and they also requested us to come back for similar events soon. Because of all these things, IBJ India considers the training as very satisfying and is happy to have been a part of it.

Mr. Ajay Verma leading a session on different legal issues.

In 2010, a thief came into Mr. P’s house to rob him of 6,500,000 riels (about 1,625 USD) and beat him. The victim immediately went to the police post to file a complaint, informing them that he suspected two persons: Veasna (name changed) and his son.

But Veasna, a 49 year-old farmer and father of seven children living in a deeply remote area, was in a pagoda at the time of the robbery. The police went to his house to investigate the robbery and found a gun. Veasna was absent at the time of the search and the police immediately concluded that he was guilty. They transferred the case to the Court where the prosecutor submitted it to the investigative judge. As the police could not find Veasna or his son in his house, the investigative judge issued an arrest warrant. The case had been tried in abstentia and the defendants were represented by a lawyer from Avocats Sans Frontières (ASF). The trial judge issued an arrest warrant for both Veasna and his son, charged them with robbery, and sentenced them to 6 years in prison.

On 15 August 2012, Veasna was arrested in his house and incarcerated. The police informed him neither of the warrant nor about his rights. Fortunately, the judge informed him about his sentence and explained that he had the right to file a complaint against the judgment as it was made in abstentia, which he did. As his ASF lawyer was not able to represent him, the judge assigned the case to Mr. So Bengtharun, the IBJ provincial lawyer in Prey Veng, on January 8, 2013, less than 20 days before the trial.

Mr Veasna (IBJ client), Charlène (IBJ intern), Mr. So Bengtharun (IBJ lawyer) and Veasna’s wife in their house.

The trial took place on 23 January 2013 in the Svay Rieng Court. Veasna explained that the day before the robbery he was in a pagoda for a ceremony, and that he had stayed overnight. He heard that the police were conducting a search in his house. He was scared and decided to stay in the pagoda until the police left. He reported that he still does not know how the gun got in his house because he had never owned any firearms, but that he suspected his son, who never reappeared after the event.

IBJ lawyer asked to adjourn the trial for a recess in order to prepare and call witnesses from the pagoda ceremony as well as the police chief, and the judge agreed. The IBJ lawyer worked very hard on the case and finally found enough evidence to move forward.

On the final day of trial, February 5, 2013, all the defense witnesses confirmed that Veasna was in the pagoda during the robbery. The police chief testified that he had not received any arrest warrant for Veasna before the one issued by the trial judge

The judge finally decided to acquit Veasna, who, was finally released on February 7, 2013.

Before this interaction with the criminal justice system, Veasna had never heard about IBJ. Now that he knows about it, he believes that it is a great organization which could effectively help many more poor people like him. He will spread this information in his village and beyond. After almost six months in prison, he feels very happy to be back home with his family, and is very grateful to IBJ.

Without the help of IBJ’s lawyer, Veasna’s judgment would probably have been confirmed as no further investigation would have ever been conducted. This shows how essential it is to conduct a proper investigation, including interviews of witnesses and cross-examination in court. Indeed, even though it is easier to believe something that is visible or tangible, appearances can often be deceiving.

On Saturday 31^st August, IBJ India conducted yet another successful legal awareness event in New Delhi’s Central Jail No.4 at Tihar Jail housing mostly undertrial prisoners. The purpose of the event was to raise awareness among the inmates on the following topics: effective legal representation, the importance of effective communication with lawyers, plea bargaining and bail.

Approximately 400 inmates from  the newcomer wards attended the event. IBJ`s team was comprised of Mr. Avi Singh Advocate, Supreme Court of India, Mr. Ajay Verma, Advocate (IBJ Fellow in India) and IBJ’s Duty Lawyers working in Tihar Prison Mr. Ajay Raghav, Advocate and Shiv Kumar Dwivedi, which took active sessions during the awareness event. Mr. Ajay Verma gave a short introduction on the selected topics. Mr. Avi Singh, Advocate discussed bail provisions and under what circumstances normally court exercise its discretion to grant bail in non-bailable case. During the session some of the poor inmates mentioned that though the Hon’ble court has granted them bail but they are unable to go out because they can’t furnish surety bond as no one comes to meet them and no one is there to stand surety for them.

Avi Singh’s session was followed by Mr. Ajay Verma’s talk on importance of effective communication with Lawyers. Most of the inmates realized that they don’t event talk to their lawyers, as they believe that the Lawyers would only be interested reading their documents. There were many inmates who did not have lawyers and asked IBJ India’s help in providing Lawyer. Mr. Ajay Raghav and Mr. Shiv Kumar Dwedi, Advocates volunteered to take their case.

After the session the most inmates contributed by asking and sharing problem and sought possible remedies about their cases, and in this way the communication went both ways. In fact, Around 30 people claimed that they had been falsely implicated.

In India there is a big need to inform prisoners of their legal rights, for instance there are many inmates not even aware about their right to free legal representation. The lack of effective representation is a huge problem in India. In the event, some time was devoted to talk about bail and speedy trials, and it became clear that 50-60 people were in need of legal assistance.

Despite the fact that a lot remains to be done, the event held on 31^st August was very successful. To educate inmates about their rights is an important part of IBJ India’s mandate to spread legal awareness in Prisons. The Most rewarding experience for the team was that the Superintendent (In charge of Prison) asked to visit another ward to have another interactive session. Though the team was very happy to visit another ward however due to paucity of time it had to be concluded early. IBJ would again organize another Legal Awareness camp in the same prison. In fact, the prison authorities requested IBJ to continue with these types of events. There are no doubts that the event was another small but important step on the road towards strengthening the legal justice in India.

IBJ India Country Fellow Ajay Verma talks to prisoners

]]> http://www.ibj.org/2013/05/freed-after-740-days-of-detention-while-under-provisional-release-granted/ Mon, 13 May 2013 14:06:31 +0000 http://www.ibj.org/wp_main/?p=4476 The court of Cibitoke is located in the North-West of Burundi, about 50 kilometers from the capital city Bujumbura. No prison is located in Cibitoke, so prisoners from this area are detained in the Central Prison of Mpimba located in Bujumbura. To hear criminal matters, this court has to make “itinerants,” where judges and prosecutors from Cibitoke court move to Bujumbura. They then hold hearings in the courtroom of one of Bujumbura tribunals. The provisional relocations are supported by the Belgian Technical Cooperation (BTC), which financially supports the transportation needed to allow the court to leave Cibitoke and come to Bujumbura.

On March 27^th, 2013, the court in the Rohero Tribunal conducted a hearing. From 9 o’clock, twenty defendants awaited the arrival of the judges while IBJ lawyers interviewed them. Among the issues scheduled, there was a case of four defendants that captured the human rights defenders’ attention. These defendants had been arrested on January 21, 2011.

As of March 16, 2011, the judge granted them provisional release. The prosecution objected to this decision and appealed. The Court of Appeal of Bujumbura maintained the first decision, which was notified to the defendants on November 13, 2012. Burundi’s law provides that in case of pre-trial detention, the appeal must be dealt with in 72 hours. In the defendants’ case, the appeal procedure lasted for almost twenty months, time during which the defendants were held in detention throughout the procedure. A worrying fact was that those defendants remained in prison despite the second decision.

The day before, when prison officials were calling defendants who were going to appear in court, one of the four defendants was not on the list. Bnub and Aprodh, agents who followed their case, warned the other three defendants that their case could not be heard in the absence of their co-accused. Bnub and Aprodh followed the cases and did their best for the defendant to appear.

At the call of the case, Janvier Ncamatwi, an IBJ lawyer, denounced all the irregularities related to illegal detention of his clients. Among others, he let the seat note that his clients were supposed to walk free according to decision taken by the court. He went on by inviting judges to analyze whether his clients were irregularly maintained in detention. He was vouching for release of his clients. According to him, the seat had to decide on the benches and order their provisional release. The prosecution unsuccessfully tried to oppose the IBJ lawyer’s arguments. The seat left the room to deliberate. After ten minutes, the session was reopened and the President of the seat confirmed that the four defendants were to walk free.

This joyful decision caused tears to pour down the defendants’ faces.

The seat had then to deal with the substance of the case. IBJ lawyer requested the implementation of the first decision to allow defendants to consult their records in order to prepare their defense. The case was thus reported in 29 April 2013.

On that day, of the 10 defendants whose cases have been assisted by IBJ lawyers, four have been granted provisional release, five have seen their cases closed and taken for deliberation and another case was handed over on April 29, 2013.

International Bridges to Justice was pleased to see that the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Office of the United Nations in Burundi in the section of Human Rights and Justice, who were present during the audiences, decided to follow up with that case until the decision of the court was effectively implemented. On the following day, the four accused defended by IBJ were released after 740 days of detention with a provisional release granted.

IBJ lawyers and volunteers Astère Muyango, Aline Nijimbere, Janvier Ncamatwi, Modeste Niyonsaba and Audace Gatavu assisted more than thirty five defendants from the provinces of Cibitoke and Mwaro on 29^th and 30^th of April in 29 cases. The inmates from Mwaro were assisted in the province of Muramvya, which is the location of the prison in which they are detained. Most of the cases have been closed and submitted for deliberation.
IBJ continues to support the accused in Burundi. As the IBJ Founder and CEO, Karen Tse wrote in From Fear to Hope, citing Martin Luther King, “the time is always ripe for justice”. Justice does not “roll in on the wheels of inevitability” but comes about because of dedication and hard work of committed individuals.

“I remained at liberty and I am thankful to the court for its fair decision. Besides, I want to express special thanks to the people who were participating in my life, without whom such court decision would not be possible. I thank the Justice Makers, the public representative L. Solovyeva, the defence lawyer appointed by law, the human rights defenders and the lawyers!

Thank you, Justice Makers!”

 Egor (not his real name), Russia, 2013

Thanks to our common efforts with the JusticeMakers community and to the wonderful project of Larissa Solovyeva, our 2012 JusticeMakers Fellow in Russia, Egor has been released from eight years of imprisonment. The release of Egor was made possible thanks to the joint efforts of L. Solovyeva, a defence lawyer and IBJ’s JusticeMaker in Kaliningrad, who was acting under the guidance of the defence lawyer, A. Koss and the human rights defender, E. Polozkov.

It all started on March 5, 2011 when a seriously ill drug addict, Egor was arrested after buying heroin. He was charged with five counts of attempt of sale of drugs in “a large amount” committed by a group of people. On March 6, 2013 Egor was sentenced, after having confessed crimes in detention while having withdrawal syndrome.

The prosecutor asked to sentence him to eight years imprisonment in a penal colony of a special regime.

 The defender, Larissa Solovyeva managed to protect the right of Egor to life, preserve his freedom and to protect his right to a fair trial. She successfully brought the attention of the court to the following facts:

–  Existing brutal practices included manipulation, involving the health condition of seriously ill and drug-addicted people while they experience withdrawal syndrome in order to extract a necessary testimony from them. Police employ duress to convince the accused to cooperate with them by participating in the “controlled purchase of drugs” and to commit perjury by promising a pre trial release.

–  Eight years imprisonment with the disease suffered by the accused is de facto capital punishment.

–  Consequently, the ill person who perjured himself in order to survive could get a death penalty for a crime he did not commit.

–  The police officers have not properly performed their tasks. They did not reveal the sources of drug supply and the buyers, and thus did not stop a criminal activity. Instead, they initiated its continuation.

–  The co-accused did not have the bag of drugs.

She also drew the Court’s attention on the fact that two years spent between freedom and prison is a punishment on itself. She asked the court to show leniency considering the length of her client’s pre-trial detention.

The Court finally changed the qualification of his crime from ‘sale of drugs’ to ‘aiding a drug purchase’. The court established that three out of the five counts of drug purchase had improper evidence. Also, the Court recognized the right of Egor to rehabilitation. He was sentenced with two years imprisonment in a colony of a severe regime, but was exempted from the punishment due to the expiry of the limitation period because March 5, 2013 marked two years since the day of committing the crime.

One IBJ client was barely 15 years old when he was arrested on 6 July 2007. He was accused of burglary and put in pre-trial detention. The only existing documentation of his detention is the arrest warrant (dated 06/07/2007), and the order to detain him provisionally (dated 23/08/2008). It was only after almost two years after his arrest that he appeared before the court in a public hearing. He pled not guilty, but was not assisted by a lawyer (although the right to legal assistance is stated in both the Constitution and the Procedural Penal Code). The attorney general asked for a punishment of 4 years of imprisonment. Following the hearing, on 13/04/2010 the court condemned the young man to 2 years of imprisonment. The court took several circumstances into account, including the fact that the accused was a minor. But although the condemned was detained over 2 years already by the time of the judgement (2 years and 10 months to be exact), he was not immediately freed. In fact, he ended up in detention for almost 4 years.

The case was brought under the attention of an IBJ lawyer during one of IBJ’s visits to the prison.  At that point, the condemned was already imprisoned for 3 years and 9 months. Seeing the striking circumstances of the case, the lawyer did not hesitate to act and immediately verified the facts of the case by checking the relevant documents. Lawyer Aline Nijimbere found out that the facts were indeed correct, and contacted the Registry, which is the authority responsible for automatically notifying and signing the judgement to the condemned—and in this case to free him. After she contacted the Registry, the Clerk said she would free the prisoner the next Monday. However, the next Monday the prisoner was still not freed, and it was only after IBJ’s lawyer contacted the clerk again on Tuesday that he was freed.

This case does not require intensive or complicated legal assistance. The problem with cases such as this one is their identification. Once identified, the case simply needs a quick follow-up, including verification of the facts and personal contact with the Registry, in order to put pressure on officials to notice the prisoner of the judgement. All of this should be followed by his liberation.

The young man was following his primary school studies before he was arrested and jailed. Given the precarious prison conditions in Burundi in general, and the fact that there are no special measures to protect minors within the prison system whatsoever, his health was seriously affected.

When he was freed, he was very happy to see his family again and possibly continue his studies, even though he thinks he is not capable to go to school after 4 years of detention in inhumane conditions.

What went wrong in this case? Several flaws of the Burundian justice system can be pointed out with this case in an exemplary function.

-First of all, the Burundian Penal Code clearly states that no minor younger than 15 can be held criminally responsible (it is the age at the time of the criminal act that should be taken into account). Next to the criminal irresponsibility of minors under 15, the article specifies that crimes committed by them can only give rise to civil procedures. This also means that he cannot be imprisoned for a crime he is accused of.

-The Procedural Criminal Code points out clearly that pre-trial detention has to be authorized and renewed every month by a judge, by means of a motivated decision. The judge therefore should have had several occasions to notice the unlawfulness of the detention. The fact that the monthly review of the detention does not take place regularly is in itself an element that makes the pre-trial detention unlawful. Moreover, the Penal Code criminalizes the behaviour of the actors of the judicial system if they do not follow the timeframes stated in the Procedural Code without a valuable explanation.

– The fact that the accused only appeared before the court more than 2 years after his arrest and detention is unlawful. Moreover, the prisoner was not assisted by a lawyer. This is certainly not strange in Burundi, since recent studies show that only 2.7 percent of the accused can benefit from legal aid. And in this case, the young man was not liberated, although he already served almost twice the punishment required! The Registry, firstly responsible for informing the parties of the judgement and the liberation of the condemned, did not do so according to ‘a typing mistake.’

-Another authority that should have reacted on the unlawful situation is the Attorney General, since they are responsible for the executions of the judgements and should control the Registry.  These kind of actions can be resolved by IBJ trainings that gather  key criminal actors.

-Another element to consider is the unawareness of the population of their rights. If the detainee and his family were more aware of the manifest unlawfulness of the imprisonment, they would have taken firmer actions.

The justice system failed at several levels to guarantee the basic rights of the suspect, the accused and the condemned. The identified flaws should be further analysed, in order to contribute to a more efficient and fair Burundian justice system. In this case, it points clearly out that the execution of judgements is in itself a problem in Burundi.

All these malfunctions point out the relevance of IBJ actions in supporting the implementation of Burundi criminal laws.

Since 2009 Ram has continued his work with families affected by enforced disappearance in Nepal. Ram’s father Tej Bahadur Bhandari was kidnapped by state police forces on December 31^st 2001. Along with 1,300 others that were taken by both State and Maoist forces between 1996 and 2006, this record of disappearance has become one of the greatest unaddressed legacies of Nepal’s Civil War.

Families of those disappeared continue to languish in pain while the government by and large continues to overlook the issue. For much of the past 5 years the government has been involved in a number of post conflict transitional justice initiatives including the framing of a new constitution, integrating the state and rebel army and developing a plan for state restructuring. In addition, the comprehensive peace agreement signed in 2006 laid the groundwork for two commissions – one on disappearances and one for truth and reconciliation – meant to deal with the injustices and human rights violations perpetrated during the conflict. Neither of these commissions has been formed and no cases of disappearance, extrajudicial killing or human rights violations have been tried in court. The human rights community has rallied around numerous emblematic cases, bringing much needed attention to some of the violations that took place, but for the most part families continue to wait in silence. While the government has provided some monetary reparation, families seek the truth and remains of their loved ones in order to perform the last nights required in the Hindu tradition.

These are but a few of the barriers to justice and reconciliation for the families of the disappeared in Nepal. The end of the conflict in 2006 brought a surge of hope and belief that the country could and indeed would move forward, forging a ‘New Nepal’ that would respect the rights of its citizens. It is these families and rights that Ram Kumar has been working to defend for the past 5 years. His work began in 2007 and was in large part enabled by the IBJ JusticeMakers Fellowship. Today Ram is the founder and chairman of the National Network of Families of the Disappeared and Missing (NEFAD) that represents more than 1300 families across Nepal that have suffered the disappearance of their loved ones. NEFAD works tirelessly to bring the voices and concerns of these families to the capital, Kathmandu, to be included in the national transitional justice debate.

IBJ’s work focuses on investigative torture, pre-trial detention and the usurping of freedoms within poorly functioning judicial systems. Those who were disappeared during Nepal’s Civil War were done so without legal precedent and without trial. In many cases, including that of Tej Bhandari, people were accused by the state of being rebel supporters and were detained without proof. Unfortunately those violations cannot be undone, but activists like Ram fight everyday to achieve truth and reconciliation for the families. New Nepal has yet to arrive, but gradual progress is being made everyday on these issues and hopefully one day the families of the disappeared in Nepal will be able to rest in peace, having learned the truth about their family members.

If you would like to read more about Ram’s work, please visit the NEFAD  website.