A new study from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) underscores the risks that journalists face, showing that almost 90 percent of those found responsible for the deaths of more than 1,100 reporters and journalists, between 2006 and 2018, have not been convicted.
The report, called Intensified Attacks, New Defences, covers the period 2014-2018. It assesses trends in the safety of journalists and media professionals around the world and provides an update on the status of journalist killings, based on condemnations issued by the Director-General and recorded in the UNESCO Observatory of Killed Journalists. 2Key findings include the rise in the number of journalist killings and other attacks, as well as the continued trend of widespread impunity. The report highlights the changing nature of violence against journalists, with more and more journalists being killed outside of conflict areas, and the growing prevalence of threats and harassment in the online sphere. It also highlights the specific risks being faced by women journalists, including online where they are disproportionately targeted by harassment and abuse. The intensified attacks against journalists are being met with a growing commitment to monitoring, protection, prevention and prosecution mechanisms for the safety of journalists. New coalitions, involving Members States, civil society, the media and academia reflect a stronger and more coordinated response to the protection of journalists, in line with the logic of the UN Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity.
The report also notes that killings of journalists have risen by about 18 percent in the past five years (2014-2018), compared to the previous five-year period.
The deadliest countres for journalists, according to the statistics, are Arab States, where almost a third of the killings took place. The Latin American and Caribbean region (26 percent), and Asian and Pacific States (24 per cent) are the next most dangerous. Journalists are often murdered for their reporting on politics, crime and corruption, and this is reflected in the study, which reveals that, in the past two years (2017-2018), more than half of journalist fatalities were in non-conflict zones. In his statement, the UN Secretary-General noted the rise in the scale and number of attacks on journalists and media workers, as well as incidents that make their work much harder, including “threats of prosecution, arrest, imprisonment, denial of journalistic access, and failures to investigate and prosecute crimes against them”….“Without the ability to protect journalists, our ability to remain informed and contribute to decision-making, is severely hampered.”
India has similarly horrifying stories to tell, where the brutal murder of Bangalore-based journalist Gauri Lankesh in 2017 made headlines. Lankesh, the editor of Kannada weekly Lankesh Patrike, was shot dead in cold blood by religious activists at her residence, allegedly because of her liberal views. Though one of the six arrested gang members confessed to the crime last year, no convictions have been secured in the case. [see https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2018/05/27/un-rapporteurs-ask-india-to-protect-journalist-rana-ayyub-and-refer-to-fate-of-gauri-lankesh/]
This year UNESCO has launched the #KeepTruthAlive social media campaign, which draws attention to the dangers faced by journalists close to their homes, highlighting the fact that 93 percent of those killed work locally, and featuring an interactive map created for the campaign, which provides a vivid demonstration of the scale and breadth of the dangers faced by journalists worldwide.
The seventh edition of the Human Rights Watch Nairobi Film Festival which showcased five films at various locations in the city between October 15 and 18, 2019. Each film was followed by a panel discussion about human rights activism. The festival’s films document struggles faced by activists in the region and elsewhere on the continent, who are pushing back against abuses by states and corporations, often at a personal cost. The festival aimed to generate discussions around movement-building and government’s responsibility to protect human rights defenders.
On 20 October human rights defenders held the Heroes concert on Mashujaa Day. The concert took place at Alliance Francaise to honor over 200 Human Rights Defenders who have made unparalleled sacrifices and contribution into the liberation of the country, advancement of human rights and social justice. The Coalition emphasized its recognition on human rights defenders and social justice activists who have played a crucial role in liberating Kenya with a special mention of Prof. YashPal Ghai. According the Kamau Ngugi, Executive Director, National Coalition of Human Rights Defenders: “For far too long we have had major contributions of many human rights defenders who have continuously pursued the social justice but sadly do not get to be celebrated in any way. Mashujaa Festival is a creative space where as a society we recognize and honor these heroes and heroines.” Top musicians and poets included Sarabi band, Mbogi Konnection, H_Art the band and spoken word poets including Javan the poet, Ndungi Githuku, gravity band, Anthem Republic
Concert to recognize over 200 human rights defenders for their fight for social justice
Human Rights Commission (HRC) President Awwad Al-Awwad tol inaugurate on Sunday a new initiative.
Whay to say about this news item published by the Saudi Gazette on 1 November 2019? On the one hand we all wish that countries take the implementation of international human rights mechanisms seriously. On the other hand, there must be a limit to obfuscation. The Saudi Human Rights Commission (HRC) has no independent status [see https://nhri.ohchr.org/EN/Documents/Status%20Accreditation%20Chart%20(04%20March%202019.pdf].
In March 2019, the Human Rights Commission defended the Saudi authorities’ refusal to allow an international investigation into the 2 October 2018 assassination of Jamal Khashogg.
Still, the article boosts that Human Rights Commission President Awwad Al-Awwad will inaugurate on Sunday an initiative to use the national database in order to track the implementation of the recommendations of the international mechanisms with regard to human rights abd thus will become the first Arab country to implement this initiative.
The ceremony will be held at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Riyadh. The initiative comes within the framework of a memorandum of technical cooperation signed between the Kingdom, represented by HRC, and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). Under the deal, HRC works to enhance national capacities in the fields of human rights within the Kingdom and outside, through the preparation, development and implementation of specialized training programs, including the mechanisms of the United Nations and the work of the competent international organizations.
Meanwhile, Al-Awwad made on Thursday an inspection tour of the General Intelligence Prison in Al-Hair, near Riyadh, and was reassured of the services being offered to the inmates. He also reviewed the prison’s compliance of the human rights criteria in line with the local and international conventions and regulations. Al-Awwad toured various facilities of the prison, including governmental and non-governmental offices that monitor the conditions of the inmates as well as the family facility where inmates meet their relatives, and the prison hospital.
The report below was published in Dawn. It shows that thinking about multimedia tools in the struggle against gender-based violence is alive and well at the ground level where it matters most:
Speakers at the Media Conference in Peshawar on Thursday 17 October 2019 called for the resolution of the issues of media persons to enable them to effectively play their role as human rights defenders. The event titled ‘media, gender and right to service’ highlighted the significance of different mediums of media and stressed the need for their use for the eradication of sexual and gender-based violence and change in the people’s attitudes towards social issues through better awareness.
It was organised by Blue Veins in collaboration with the Peshawar Press Club and Right to Public Service Commission. Provincial anti-harassment ombudsperson Rukhshanda Naz said gender-based violence was one of the most prevalent human rights abuses. She said journalists could play a fundamental role in highlighting the voice of the people, whose rights were violated. Ms Naz said media could help highlight interventions and change attitudes, practices and behaviours, which drove violence against women.
Chief Commissioner of the Right to Public Services Commission Mohammad Mushtaq Jadoon said the media was playing the role of an ‘agenda setter’, which could easily disseminate information and influence public opinion. He said the use of modern media tactics could promote human rights.
Programme coordinator of Blue Veins Qamar Naseem said media was one of the pillars of power to influence public attitudes and social structure. He said the government and non-government service providers were struggling to improve response services to gender-based violence, so they needed to become skilled at engaging journalists in their coordinated efforts as an integral part of advocacy.
Journalists Aqeel Yousafzai and Waseem Ahmad called for the adoption of multimedia engagement approach. They said an intensive multimedia campaign would help reduce and prevent gender-based violence and ensure that the survivors have safe and improved access to services.
Chairman of the Department of Journalism and Mass Communication, University of Peshawar, Dr Faizullah Jan said to improve the role of media towards better understanding of gender roles, social attitudes and root causes of gender-based violence, there was a need for ensuring adequate capacity development and sensitisation for effective media reporting on gender-based violence issues.
General secretary of Khyber Union of Journalists Mohammad Naeem said such events could suggested actions to policymakers and the media for advocating a stronger legal and regulatory environment to support voluntary, equitable and rights-based programmes. The conference also contributed into the signing of a statement by media representatives promising commitment to addressing sexual and gender-based violence in collaboration with provincial and national stakeholders.
“As we all know, HRDs continue to be discriminated, intimidated, harassed, criminalized and killed on an alarming scale and those suffering intersecting forms of discrimination are at an even higher risk. Action to tackle this scourge needs to be taken urgently and this is a powerful tool to address those with power: States, businesses, financial institutions, donors and intergovernmental organizations. Since the action plan was adopted, this document has already been presented to the United Nations General Assembly and has been regularly referred to in our advocacy work at the national level and in our work as international civil society organizations. We hope you agree that we need to keep this document alive and use it in our everyday activism and ensure that the right to defend human rights is upheld.
So, in this context, we urge you to for example:
Use it in your campaigns;
Refer to it in your interactions with State officials, companies, financial institutions, donors, INGOs;
Share it with other organizations, groups, and individuals who could not attend the Paris Summit;
Victor Madrigal-Borloz, the U.N. independent expert, is now in residence at Harvard Law School. Kris Snibbe/Harvard Staff Photographer
Liz Mineo,Harvard Staff Writer, published on 22 October the following interview with Victor Madrigal-Borloz, the U.N. independent expert’ who examines root causes and highlights danger spots and progress
Costa Rican magistrate Victor Madrigal-Borloz has served for the past 21 months as the U.N. independent experton protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. The Gazette interviewed Madrigal-Borloz, who is the Eleanor Roosevelt Senior Visiting Researcher with the Human Rights Program at Harvard Law School, to talk about his work and his hopes for the future:
GAZETTE: Why did you decide to take on this role?
MADRIGAL-BORLOZ: I have been working in the field of human rights for over 20 years and I saw the possibility to bring about substantial change. The topic bears a lot of significance to me, as a gay man myself. I have been working on these issues for over a decade, first at the Inter-American Commission [on Human Rights] and now at the global level. I have seen many people suffer as a result of stigma and discrimination, and this was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to do something about it and put my skills at the service of a cause.
GAZETTE: What did your report find in terms of the root causes of violence and discrimination against LGBT people?
MADRIGAL-BORLOZ:There are primary and secondary root cases. First, there is the notion that societies are structured around certain power relations, which have been designed in relation to a person’s sex. Your role in society is determined by your genital configuration. That’s a very basic construction, and all forms of violence and discrimination come from a defense of those power relations. The other factors come from mechanisms that aim to protect those power relations, such as the idea that gay, lesbian, or trans people don’t exist, and the stigma around them, which is enabled through the message that gay, trans, bisexual, and lesbian people are sick or mentally ill. The other aspect is criminalization. Same-sex relations are still criminalized in 69 countries, which means that, as of today, over 2 billion people live in countries where being gay or lesbian is illegal. Another factor is demonization expressed in the notion that somehow LGBT lives are sinful, immoral; that gays or lesbians cannot be good citizens. The idea is that at the end of the day, there’s something immoral about our existence, and that’s what all of us need to fight against.
GAZETTE: Of your findings, which ones struck you the most?
MADRIGAL-BORLOZ:What disturbs me is that in 2019 there are countries that are considering bringing back the death penalty for same-sex relations. There was a discussion in Uganda about it, and early this year Brunei Darussalam enacted legislation allowing the stoning of gay men. That, to me, is shocking. What I also find surprising is that there are environments that are actually extremely progressive when it comes to gender identity, but can be very restrictive when it comes to sexual orientation and vice versa. In Pakistan, for example, there is an extremely forward legislation on the recognition of gender identity, but sexual orientation is very much criminalized. Sexual orientation has always been a more challenging notion for societies, which in general have used the notion of a traditional binary, hetero-parental family as the nucleus of society, and this has been recognized in public discourse and in the law. But what we also know is that homosexuals, lesbians, and bisexuals have existed and sought happiness all throughout history.
GAZETTE: What policies or practices have been the most successful in the protection of LGBT rights?
MADRIGAL-BORLOZ: Anti-discrimination legislation with the words sexual orientation and gender identity is very important because it allows for all actors in the system to understand that a red line has been drawn and that shouldn’t be crossed. This creates the belief that lesbian, gay, trans, bisexual, or gender-diverse people are entitled to protection. Other good practices are policies aiming at promoting integration of LGBT people in society and campaigns to change hearts and minds.
Let me give you an example. About a year ago, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights issued an advisory opinion, OC-24, which determined that Costa Rica and other countries in the continent must implement same-sex marriage, and it gave a time frame for that. Despite the fact that this created great polarization in Costa Rica, the Costa Rican state has now put together a campaign called “Yes, I do,” or in Spanish, “Si, Acepto,” which focuses on the parents of gay and lesbian children and their reasons why they support gay marriage and why their children are entitled to happiness.
Another good measure is access to justice, and this means that judges have to actively seek to implement the principle of nondiscrimination when it comes to LGBT rights. That’s what the Supreme Court of India, the Supreme Court in Botswana, and the High Court in Trinidad and Tobago did when they voted to decriminalize gay sex in their respective countries.
GAZETTE:How do you explain the dramatic advances in the protection of LGBT rights in regions such as Latin America, where same-sex marriage is now legal in five countries?
MADRIGAL-BORLOZ:It’s the work of civil society and human-rights defenders and advocates who have fought relentlessly for their rights. I began working on these issues over a decade ago, and at that time the trans movement in South America was strong. An extraordinary trans activist in Argentina, Lohana Berkins, used to say that trans women must expose the audacity of their bodies to the society that fails to understand the fragility of their lives. The average life expectancy of a trans woman in Latin America is 35 years, and that’s what Berkins was talking about. It was her voice and those of other great fighters in the LGBT movement that forced people to see their humanity, and ensured that Argentina, Uruguay, and other countries in the continent have the most advanced legislation on legal recognition of gender identity.
GAZETTE:Which countries are the worst and best performers in terms of LGTB rights?
MADRIGAL-BORLOZ:I have a lot of resistance to ranking countries, because things change very fast. Most of these rights are not necessarily enshrined or written in stone; there are forces in societies that are quite keen on seeing them taken back. We live in times in which rising populism uses certain categories of people, such as LGBT communities, as pawns for their political objectives. But I can say that the most problems arise in the countries where gay sex is criminalized, and they are roughly distributed along the Caribbean, sub-Saharan Africa, some regions of Asia, and the Middle East. It’s not a small part of the world. Criminalization forces people to live underground, and often the situation of those whose existence is considered criminal is devastating. The killing of trans women, for example, has been invisible from public records because they are classified as men. And the levels of violence against lesbian women and gay men all over the world is worrisome.
GAZETTE: Why have there been more gains in protection of sexual orientation than gender identity, and what does it say about the possibility of social change?
MADRIGAL-BORLOZ:There is a certain concentration of power and influence within gay and lesbian, or cisgender, urban populations. They have been able to represent their valid agendas in the political debate. On issues of concern for the gay and lesbian urban upper and middle class, there has been more progress than on those concerning trans women or trans men coming from the countryside. But those gains show that social change is possible within one generation. Those of us who were born in the ’60s have seen the world change from a majority of countries criminalizing and pathologizing LGBT identities to a majority of countries embracing the richness that comes from diversity.
Social change is possible when the prime minister of Luxembourg speaks at the General Assembly last week, and declares “I was never hoping to be the gay prime minister. I just happen to be the gay prime minister.” When political leaders take part in a pride parade, they are changing the views that people have about LGBT people. I’ve had the honor of marching alongside Justin Trudeau in Vancouver, and the first lady of Costa Rica in pride parades. That makes me hopeful, but also the fact that the new generations have changed their paradigm of thinking; they embrace the notion that their existence is not determined by rigid notions of gender. That is a great source of inspiration.
But I worry that for some, the change will not come fast enough. Elderly LGBT people are suffering enormous health disparities, and after living their lives in inclusive environments, they are being forced to go back into the closet as they move to retirement communities that are not prepared to cater for their needs. They deserve happiness now.
GAZETTE: What would you like to see happening before your tenure as the U.N. independent expert ends in 2020?
MADRIGAL-BORLOZ:My dream is to see a world free of criminalization of same-sex relations by 2030. Given the fact that international human rights law considers criminalization of same-sex relations a violation of human rights, I see no reason why states would actually get away with continuing this practice past 2030. That’s what I like to dream about.
Andrew Smith and Matt Pollard in JustSecurity of 30 October 2019 publilshed a long article on the travails of the mandate “Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism” in the United Nations.
Background: In March 2018 at the Human Rights Council in Geneva, two resolutions of separate lineage were merged: a resolution on “protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism,” led by Mexico for many years with consensus support; and a resolution presented by Egypt since 2015, on “effects of terrorism on the enjoyment of human rights,” which was deeply divisive. Parallel resolutions at the General Assembly were also merged in December 2018. Both merged resolutions were adopted by consensus. For several years, Egypt has been seeking to undermine longstanding consensus on norms for human rights in countering terrorism, in both Geneva and New York. Ben Saul chronicles well how this originated and spread in “United Nations Backslides on Human Rights in Counterterrorism” (Lawfare, Oct. 16, 2019), Civil society organizations including those of the authors, ARTICLE 19 and the International Commission of Jurists, have worked to turn back Egypt’s destructive efforts, with occasional — albeit limited — success. As Saul explains, the main effect of the merger has been to shift focus away from the Mexican-led resolution’s emphasis on human rights violations in the context of countering terrorism and the human rights of victims of terrorism, towards the Egyptian emphasis on impacts of terrorism on government finances and macro-economic conditions as well as a reaffirmation of states’ authority to impose counter-terrorism measures.
For states to treat Egypt as a reliable partner by allowing it joint leadership on the UN resolutions on human rights and terrorism only helps to provide cover for and perpetuate this egregious pattern, with serious consequences for the lives and dignity of Egyptians seeking to exercise their fundamental rights. The 74th session of the UN General Assembly Third Committee is an important opportunity for states to not only end their misguided acquiescence in Egyptian efforts to undermine UN work on terrorism and human rights, but also to restore the long legacy of Mexican leadership on the resolutions. In addition to the reasons identified in Saul’s Lawfare piece (which we won’t repeat here), several factors make this particular General Assembly resolution potentially an even more impactful moment.
…
In this moment, member states should recognize that a continuation of a Mexico-Egypt merged resolution on “terrorism and human rights” holds no promise of positive results for human rights. Now is the time for UN members to turn the tables and take a principled and strategic position: if Egypt will not agree to restoring key normative provisions previously lost, vigorously reinforcing rather than eroding support for the existing focus of the Special Rapporteur mandate, and laying the appropriate groundwork for a strong GCTS review in 2020, then states should insist that the merger be brought to an end and go back to the consensus text of resolution A/72/180.
According to a lawsuit announced on Tuesday, the Israeli spyware-maker NSO Group developed malware specifically to access WhatsApp communications. Photograph by Daniella Cheslow / AP
On May 13th, WhatsApp announced that it had discovered the vulnerability. In a statement, the company said that the spyware appeared to be the work of a commercial entity, but it did not identify the perpetrator by name. WhatsApp patched the vulnerability and, as part of its investigation, identified more than fourteen hundred phone numbers that the malware had targeted. In most cases, WhatsApp had no idea whom the numbers belonged to, because of the company’s privacy and data-retention rules. So WhatsApp gave the list of phone numbers to the Citizen Lab, a research laboratory at the University of Toronto’s Munk School of Global Affairs, where a team of cyber experts tried to determine whether any of the numbers belonged to civil-society members.
On Tuesday 29 October 2019, WhatsApp took the extraordinary step of announcing that it had traced the malware back to NSO Group, a spyware-maker based in Israel, and filed a lawsuit against the company—and also its parent, Q Cyber Technologies—in a Northern California court, accusing it of “unlawful access and use” of WhatsApp computers. According to the lawsuit, NSO Group developed the malware in order to access messages and other communications after they were decrypted on targeted devices, allowing intruders to bypass WhatsApp’s encryption.
NSO Group said in a statement in response to the lawsuit, “In the strongest possible terms, we dispute today’s allegations and will vigorously fight them. The sole purpose of NSO is to provide technology to licensed government intelligence and law enforcement agencies to help them fight terrorism and serious crime. Our technology is not designed or licensed for use against human rights activists and journalists.” In September, NSO Group announced the appointment of new, high-profile advisers, including Tom Ridge, the first U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security, in an effort to improve its global image.
In a statement to its users on Tuesday, WhatsApp said, “There must be strong legal oversight of cyber weapons like the one used in this attack to ensure they are not used to violate individual rights and freedoms people deserve wherever they are in the world. Human rights groups have documented a disturbing trend that such tools have been used to attack journalists and human rights defenders.”
John Scott-Railton, a senior researcher at the Citizen Lab, said, “It is the largest attack on civil society that we know of using this kind of vulnerability.”
On 29 October 2019 Catrinel Motoc, Amnesty International’s senior campaigner on shrinking space and on human rights defenders at risk, wrote a moving personal account of the court sesstion that vindicated anti-facist campaigners in Poland:
It was 11 November 2017 at the Independence Day march in Warsaw. For some years now this annual event, organised to mark Poland’s independence, had been tainted by the presence of some nationalist groups advocating “Europe will be white or deserted,” displaying racist and fascist symbols, while marching holding flares and throwing firecrackers on the streets of Warsaw. In 2017, these women decided it was time to act. As they unfurled a banner reading “Fascism Stop,” their peaceful protest against hate caused fury among the marchers. Video footage shows people reacting by kicking, spitting and screaming at them. They were called “sluts,” “lefty scoundrels” and “whores.” They were pushed, jostled, grabbed by the neck and dragged onto the pavement, suffering bruises and cuts. One of the women lost consciousness after being dropped on the ground and needed medical help. The authorities initially closed the investigation into the attacks with an absurd justification. But after the women appealed in February 2019, a judge ordered the investigation into the violence to be re-opened. However, adding insult to injury, the women were themselves charged with obstructing a lawful assembly and fined. And so their battle for justice began…..
The women being attacked at the Independence Day march in 2017.Tomasz Stepien
One by one the women stood up, said their full names and stated proudly that they wanted to be found ‘not guilty.’ Kinga, the last of them to speak, explained bluntly and movingly what compelled her to stand against hate on that night: ‘My grandfather was wounded in the battle of ’39. My mother went to the Uprising. My stepfather was in the home army in Kielce. My grandmother worked in a hospital. They are now dead and I am happy because I would not like them to see what is happening today.’
As the judgement was announced, suddenly I heard relieved sighs around the room. I turn to my colleague asking “what did he say?” and she confirmed: “They are not guilty! They are not guilty!” The judge upheld their rights to freedom of expression and freedom of assembly and, significantly, he told the women, “You were right.” As he finished, the room burst into a round of applause in celebration.
This case started with injustice but has finished with justice, and a message that fascism and hatred will not be tolerated in Poland.
Sadako Ogatathe first woman to head the UN High Commissioner for Refugees has died at the age of 92 on 22 October 2019. I served under her for many years and have the greatest admiration for her. Sadako Ogata worked on some of the largest crises of the decade during her time in service from 1991 to 2000, including the Kurdish refugees fleeing from Iraq after the 1991 Gulf War, the Balkans War and the Great Lakes region of Africa. Before joining the UN, she was an academic – serving as dean of the faculty of foreign studies at Sophia University in Tokyo in 1989, where she had been a professor since 1980. She was well respected by UN staff and world leaders alike, and was described by her colleagues as a “five-foot giant” for her formidable negotiating skills and ability to confront hostile factions. From 2003 to 2012, Ogata was the head of the Japan International Cooperation Agency, overseeing efforts to provide assistance to those in developing countries.
Back in Japan, she also criticised her country’s low acceptance of refugees. “Japan has to set up a situation to welcome people… those who are in need, in serious need… I think we should be open to bringing them in,” she said in a Reuters interview in 2015. “[To say] Japan does not have resources, that’s nonsense.”
She rightly received a lot of recognition while alive, including:
1994 Franklin Roosevelt Four Freedoms Award
1994 Prize for Freedom (Liberal Int’l)
1994 International Human Rights Law Group Award
1995 Liberty Medal
1995 Freedom Award (refugees)
1997 Ramon Magsaysay Award for Community Leadership
Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards 