A/HRC/45/CRP.7 amount to ill-treatment if not torture.508 International humanitarian law also explicitly prohibits the execution of individuals taking no part in hostilities unless there is a judgement pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording judicial guarantees.509 Factual findings 337. The administration of justice is crucial for the safeguarding and protection of human rights. Yet in Yemen, there are a range of violations occurring within this very sphere. These violations need to be considered against the background of considerable pre-existing weaknesses of the Yemeni justice system (detailed further in Chapter VI, see para. 363 and ff). However, the armed conflict has significantly exacerbated these weaknesses and further undermined the administration of justice in Yemen. During this reporting period, the Group of Experts focused its investigation on three main issues: the operation of the Specialized Criminal Courts, violations of fair trial rights and attacks on the judiciary. 1. The Specialized Criminal Courts 338. The Specialized Criminal Court (SCC) is a court of first instance. It is not referred to in the Constitution, but the first SCC was established by Presidential Decree 391/1999 and was originally given jurisdiction over the acts of attacking, terrorising or robbing people on public highways, deserts, buildings, ships or planes. Its jurisdiction was subsequently expanded to include a wide range of security-related offences (including drug trafficking, harming the security of the State, and aggression against members of the judicial authority). There are now four Specialized Criminal Courts which each have jurisdiction over a specific set of governorates, together covering the whole of Yemen. 339. Following the 2015 take over by the de facto authorities, state institutions have been duplicated as between the Government of Yemen and de facto authorities. There has thus been the creation of two separate Supreme Judicial Councils, one in Sana’a under the de facto authorities and the other in Aden under the Government of Yemen. With the advent of this dual system the appointment of judges, including those of the SCC, and the functioning of the justice system has become further influenced by political and sectarian considerations.510 340. By way of example, in Sana’a, since the de facto authorities have been in control, the Head of the SCC has changed at least three times, with the last two office-holders reportedly being Houthi-affiliates.511 Members of the SCC are appointed by the Supreme Judicial Council in Sana’a. However, this body is seen as lacking in legitimacy due to the departure of members nominated according to the law prior to the take over by the Houthis, and their replacement with persons loyal to the Houthis and their political and security agenda. 341. The Group has documented several cases where the SCC, in particular the SCC in Sana’a, has become an instrument to suppress dissent, to pursue political objectives of intimidation of political opponents, and to develop political capital to be used in negotiations. Of further concern is the near doubling of death sentences imposed by the SCC in Sana’a since 2018. While none of the death sentences in the cases investigated by the Group have been carried out thus far, in several cases judges’ orders for the confiscation of defendants’ property (using the power under the Yemeni Criminal Code) have been implemented. In all cases examined by the Group, the SCC in Sana’a has consistently disregarded the fundamental rights of the accused to a fair trial (see paras 348 and ff below). 342. The SCC in Sana’a is perhaps the most active judicial body in Yemen, given also that the justice system is virtually paralysed in many areas of the country. While official records are not accessible, the SCC in Sana’a is reportedly currently handling at least 20 key political cases involving some 308 accused.512 To illustrate the current operation of the SCC in Sana’a 508 Report of the Special Rapporteur on Torture, A/67/279, paras. 42-51, and 78. Note also the view that there is an evolving international standard to consider the death penalty itself as a violation of the prohibition of torture and ill-treatment: para. 72. 509 Common art. 3 of the Geneva Conventions, Additional Protocol II, art. 6(2). 510 Confidential sources on file. 511 Confidential sources on file. 512 Confidential sources on file. 85