GENEVA – UN experts* today expressed alarm over disciplinary proceedings initiated against judges who have applied international law in cases involving serious human rights violations.
“The initiation of disciplinary proceedings against judges for applying international human rights law gravely undermines judicial independence and represents a serious setback for victims’ access to justice,” the experts said.
They expressed strong support to Judges Richard Concepción Carhuancho and Víctor Chávez Tamariz, and to the group of Supreme Court judges who adjudicated in an important case of forced sterilisations – concurring with the 2024 ruling of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) – for upholding the principle that crimes against humanity are not subject to statutory limitations.
“We call on Peru to fully safeguard judicial independence and to ensure no further proceedings are initiated,” the experts said.
Since the entry into force of two laws – one imposing statutory limitations on crimes against humanity and war crimes and the other granting amnesty to security forces, both criticised by UN experts – most requests for amnesty or prescription have been rejected by judges who have applied international human rights law through the doctrine of conventionality control. Yet, these decisions have now come under the scrutiny of the National Justice Board, the main oversight body for justice operators, which has resorted to disciplinary proceedings against those judges.
“We urge the National Justice Board to refrain from initiating or pursuing disciplinary proceedings grounded on political motivations and in particular based on judges’ compliance with international law,” the experts said.
They recalled that international standards clearly establish that judges may only be suspended or removed from office on serious grounds of misconduct or incompetence and in accordance with fair procedures guaranteeing objectivity and impartiality.
The experts also stressed that international standards do not allow amnesties or pardons for crimes against humanity or other gross human rights violations.
“We applaud the work of judges who uphold those standards,” they said, calling on Peru to reverse the regressive legislative setbacks in transitional justice and to put an end to attacks against judges who stand by international human rights standards.
“Judges must not face prosecution or administrative, economic or other sanctions for any action taken in accordance with recognised professional duties, standards and ethics,” the experts said, recalling as well the precedent of the case of Judge Oswaldo Ordóñez, who was not ratified in his position by the National Justice Board following his intervention at an Inter-American Commission for Human Rights’ hearing.
The experts are in contact with the Government of Peru and reiterate their availability to assist by providing technical assistance to institutions applying the laws to ensure their compliance with Peru’s international obligations.
