Author Archive

« Older posts
Newer posts »

41st UN Human Rights Council: what the NGOs see as its result

July 16, 2019

On 12 july 2019, ISHR published what key civil society organisations thought of the just finished 41st session of the UN Human Rights Council.

Civil society organisations welcomed significant outcomes of the Human Rights Council’s 41st session, including the extension of the SOGI mandate, adopting the first resolution on the Philippines and extending its scrutiny over Eritrea, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Belarus and Ukraine. This session witnessed heightened scrutiny of Council members by shedding light on the situations in Saudi Arabia and China. It missed an opportunity, however, to ensure that human rights are not sidelined in Sudan.

16 leading human rights organisations (see below) expressed regrets that Council members seek to use their seats to shield themselves and others from scrutiny. They called on States to stand with victims of human rights violations. They welcomed the renewal of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of peaceful assembly association, that the Council stood up to the global backlash against the rights of women and girls, and that it continued to address the threat posed by climate change to human rights. They also welcomed the reports on Venezuela, called on the High Commissioner to immediately release the UN database of businesses engaged with Israeli settlements, and on all States to pursue accountability for victims of intimidation and reprisals.

Full statement below:

By renewing the mandate of the Independent Expert on sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI), the Council has sent a clear message that violence and discrimination against people of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities cannot be tolerated. It reaffirmed that specific, sustained and systematic attention is needed to address these human rights violations and ensure that LGBT people can live a life of dignity. We welcome the Core Group’s commitment to engage in dialogue with all States, resulting in over 50 original co-sponsors across all regions. However, we regret that some States have again attempted to prevent the Council from addressing discrimination and violence on the basis of SOGI.

This Council session also sent a clear message that Council membership comes with scrutiny by addressing the situations of Eritrea, the Philippines, China, Saudi Arabia and the Democratic Republic of Congo. This shows the potential the Council has to leverage its membership to become more effective and responsive to rights holders and victims.

The Council did the right thing by extending its monitoring of the situation in Eritrea. The onus is on the Eritrean Government to cooperate with Council mechanisms, including the Special Rapporteur, in line with its membership obligations.

We welcome the first Council resolution on the Philippines as an important first step towards justice and accountability. We urge the Council to closely follow this situation and be ready to follow up with additional action, if the situation does not improve or deteriorates further. We deeply regret that such a resolution was necessary, due to the continuation of serious violations and repeated refusal of the Philippines – despite its membership of the Council– to cooperate with existing mechanisms.

We deplore that the Philippines and Eritrea sought to use their seats in this Council to seek to shield themselves from scrutiny, and those States [1] who stood with the authorities and perpetrators who continue to commit grave violations with impunity, rather than with the victims.

We welcome the written statement by 22 States on China expressing collective concern over widespread surveillance, restrictions to freedoms of religion and movement, and large-scale arbitrary detention of Uyghurs and other minorities in Xinjiang. We consider it as a first step towards sustained Council attention and in the absence of progress look to those governments that have signed this letter to follow up at the September session with a resolution calling for China to allow access to the region to independent human rights experts and to end country-wide the arbitrary detention of individuals based on their religious beliefs or political opinions.

We welcome the progress made in resolutions on the rights of women and girls: violence against women and girls in the world of work, on discrimination against women and girls and on the consequences of child, early and forced marriage. We particularly welcome the renewal of the mandate of the Working Group on Discrimination Against Women and Girls under its new name and mandate to focus on the intersections of gender and age and their impact on girls. The Council showed that it was willing to stand up to the global backlash against the rights of women and girls by ensuring that these resolutions reflect the current international legal framework and resisted cultural relativism, despite several amendments put forward to try and weaken the strong content of these resolutions.

However, in the text on the contribution of development to the enjoyment of all human rights, long standing consensus language from the Vienna Declaration for Programme of Action (VDPA) recognising that, at the same time, “the lack of development may not be invoked to justify the abridgment of internationally recognized human rights” has again been deliberately excluded, disturbing the careful balance established and maintained for several decades on this issue.

We welcome the continuous engagement of the Council in addressing the threat posed by climate change to human rights, through its annual resolution and the panel discussion on women’s rights and climate change at this session. We call on the Council to continue to strengthen its work on this issue, given its increasing urgency for the protection of all human rights.

The Council has missed an opportunity on Sudan where it could have supported regional efforts and ensured that human rights are not sidelined in the process. We now look to African leadership to ensure that human rights are upheld in the transition. The Council should stand ready to act, including through setting up a full-fledged inquiry into all instances of violence against peaceful protesters and civilians across the country.

During the interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial and summary executions, States heard loud and clear that the time to hold Saudi Arabia accountable is now  for the extrajudicial killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. We recall that women human rights defenders continue to be arbitrarily detained despite the calls by 36 States at the March session. We urge States to adopt a resolution at the September session to establish a monitoring mechanism over the human rights situation in the country.

We welcome the landmark report of the High Commissioner on the situation for human rights in Venezuela; in response to the grave findings in the report and the absence of any fundamental improvement of the situation in the meantime, we urge the Council to adopt a Commission of Inquiry or similar mechanism in September, to reinforce the ongoing efforts of the High Commissioner and other actors to address the situation.

We welcome the renewal of the mandate on freedom of peaceful assembly and association. This mandate is at the core of our work as civil society and we trust that the mandate will continue to protect and promote these fundamental freedoms towards a more open civic space.

We welcome the renewal of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Belarus. We acknowledge some positive signs of re-engagement in dialogue by Belarus, and an attempted negotiation process with the EU on a potential Item 10 resolution. However, in the absence of systemic human rights reforms in Belarus, the mandate and resolution process remains an essential tool for Belarusian civil society. In addition, there are fears of a spike in violations around upcoming elections and we are pleased that the resolution highlights the need for Belarus to provide safeguards against such an increase.

We welcome the renewal of the quarterly reporting process on the human rights situation in Ukraine. However, we also urge States to think creatively about how best to use this regular mechanism on Ukraine to make better progress on the human rights situation.

The continued delay in the release of the UN database of businesses engaged with Israeli settlements established pursuant to Council resolution 31/36 in March 2016 is of deep concern.  We join others including Tunisia speaking on behalf of 65 states and Peru speaking on behalf of 26 States in calling on the High Commissioner to urgently and fully fulfill this mandate as a matter of urgency and on all States to  cooperate with all Council mandates, including this one, and without political interference.

Numerous States and stakeholders highlighted the importance of the OHCHR report on Kashmir; while its release only a few days ago meant it did not receive substantive consideration at the present session, we look forward to discussing it in depth at the September session.

Finally, we welcome the principled leadership shown by Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands, in pursuing accountability for individual victims of acts of intimidation and reprisals under General Debate Item 5, contrasting with other States which tend to make only general statements of concern. We call on States to raise all individual cases at the interactive dialogue on reprisals and intimidation in the September session.

[1]States who voted against the resolution on the Eritrea: Bahrain, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, China, Cuba, Egypt, Eritrea, Iraq, India, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, the Philippines and Pakistan.
States who voted against the resolution on the Philippines: Angola, Bahrain, Cameroon, China, Cuba, Egypt, Eritrea, Hungary, Iraq, India, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, and the Philippines.

*Statement delivered by the International Service for Human Rights (ISHR) on behalf of: DefendDefenders (the East and Horn of Africa Human Rights Defenders Project); Global Initiative for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA); International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH); International Commission of Jurists (ICJ); Center for Reproductive Rights; ARTICLE 19; Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies; Human Rights House Foundation; CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation; Franciscans International; Association for Progressive Communications (APC); Amnesty International; Human Rights Watch; International Lesbian and Gay Association (ILGA).

For the preview of the the 41st session, see: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2019/06/14/guide-to-human-rights-defenders-issues-at-the-41st-human-rights-council-starting-on-24-june/

http://www.ishr.ch/news/hrc41-civil-society-presents-key-takeaways-human-rights-council

Posted in AI, FIDH, HRW, human rights, Human Rights Council, Human Rights Defenders, ISHR | Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

31st Galway Film festival honors ‘For Sama’ as best human rights film

July 16, 2019
Galway Film Fleadh 2019 award winners chosen

On Sunday July 14, 2019 the 31st Galway Film Fleadh came to a close after many Irish and international film premieres, screenings, workshops and discussions. On the last day of the festival, the film fleadh held it annual awards honouring the best of the filmmakers working in every discipline who brought their work to showcase in Galway. The best Human Rights Film (chosen in association with Amnesty International) was “For Sama” (https://www.forsamafilm.com – Director Waad al-Kateab & Edward Watts – Producer Waas Al-Kateab). The documentary film is an intimate yet epic journey into the female experience of war. The film tells the story of Waad al-Kateab’s life through five years of the uprising in Aleppo, Syria,’ and the choices she has to make to protect her daughter.

Posted in awards, films | 1 Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Abass Amiretezam’s Children Filed an Action Against Government of Iran and IRGC for Alleged 38 Years of Torture, in Federal Court

July 16, 2019
Abass Amiretezam's Children Filed an Action Against Government of Iran and IRGC for Alleged 38 Years of Torture, in Federal Court Under FSIA

On 15 July 2019, the law firm Herischi & Associates LLC issued a press release announcing that the family of Mr. Abbas Amirentezam, former Deputy Prime Minister of Iran in 1979, filed an action against the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corp (IRGC) for, allegedly, the almost 40 year unlawful incarceration and house arrest of their father who was subjected to torture, solitary confinement, and lack of medical care that ultimately led to his death in 2018. The complaint is lodged under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA)

Allegedly, Mr. Amirentezam was the longest-held political prisoner and prisoner of conscience in the Islamic Republic of Iran. According to Fariba Amini, as of 2018 he had “been in jail for 17 years and in and out of jail for the twenty one years, altogether for 38 years.” He was Iran’s Ambassador to the five Scandinavian countries and Deputy Prime Minister in the Interim Government of the Islamic Republic. Mr. Amirentezam opposed the Iranian hostage taking of the American Embassy in Tehran in 1979 and was subsequently arrested. Allegedly for 555 days, he was held in solitary confinement without access to lawyers nor any details of the charges against him before his trial; after Iran released the 52 American hostages in 1981, Amirentezam was tried without access to a lawyer and jury; he was unjustly convicted and condemned to life in prison.

The following is alleged in the complaint:

According to his memoir, “until 1996, while he was incarcerated in Evin prison, Mr. Amirentezam was denied any visitation rights and/or communication with his children. Mr. Amirentezam was routinely tortured and exposed to mock executions. He was refused medical treatment and consequently suffered irreparable damage to his health. His family not only endured his absence but lived in continuous fear of his death. Despite attempting to silence Mr. Amirentezam – he defied and remained as vocal as he could throughout his incredible hardship.”

According to UN Commission on Human Rights Report published on March 1996, Amirentezam interviewed with the UN Special Representative of the Commission on Human Rights, Mr. Maurice Copithorne. In his 1996 report to the UN, Mr. Amirentezam alleges that “1,100 political prisoners had been executed in Evin prison during one night at the beginning of the fall of 1981.” Pursuant to Mr. Amirentezam personal website, he alleges that, “despite constant pressure from the Iranian authorities, he never confessed to any erroneous allegations and never asked for mercy. He remained defiant to the end. As a result, he is the recipient the human rights award of Bruno Kreisky Prize in 1998 and the Jan Karski Award for Moral Courage in 2003.”

Mr. Amirentezam died on July 12, 2018 while under house arrest in Tehran. Allegedly until his death, he demanded a fair and public trial. Mr. Amirentezam children claimed in their Complaint that they have suffered significantly by the immense pain intentionally imposed unto their family by the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The Complaint further alleges that, “the Amirentezam family is demanding justice by exposing the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the IRGC for all the cruelty and suffering they have endured for almost four decades.”

This case is brought under terrorism exception of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia through Plaintiffs attorney, Mr. Ali Herischi of Herischi & Associates, LLC. This action is filed on the first anniversary after Mr. Amirentezam’s death. Plaintiffs are asking for compensatory and punitive damages. Mr. Herischi is hopeful that “this case will bring attention to the systematic human rights abuses and domestic terrorism by the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps.”

https://www.pr.com/press-release/789605

Posted in awards | Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , ,

DefendDefenders seeks Program and Administration Manager based in Kampala

July 16, 2019
DefendDefenders (www.defenddefenders.org/) is recruiting a Program and Administration Manager for its work in supporting HRDs. Under the overall supervision of the Director of Programs and Administration, and in direct partnership with other staff members, the PROGRAM AND ADMINISTRATION MANAGER shall be responsible, but not limited to, duties in the areas:
  • Managing programs:
  • Fundraising:
  • Administration:
  • Support the strategic development of the organisation

Competencies (see the full announcement)

Education and Professional Experience

  • A master’s degree in human rights, law, social sciences, political science, or a related field from an accredited academic institution with a minimum of five years of relevant professional experience in program/project management;
  • A solid understanding of human rights and protection mechanisms;
  • Familiarity with the East and Horn of Africa sub-region and previous experience working in the sub-region;
  • Good conceptual and analytical capacity;
  • Very good budgeting, project management, and report writing skills; and
  • Ability and willingness to travel.

Languages

Fluency in English is a must (spoken and written). Fluency in French is a strong asset, and Arabic is an asset.

Location

The position will be based in Kampala, Uganda with frequent travels within and out of the country. Applicants should be eligible to work in Uganda without restriction.

How to Apply

Applicants should send a letter of motivation, CV, and contacts of three references to: jobs@defenddefenders.org by 4 August 2019. Do not send scanned copies of certificates. Interviews will be held in person (in Kampala, Uganda), or via Skype late in August. The subject line of the email should read “Application for Program & Admin Manager position.”

Questions about the position can be directed to jobs@defenddefenders.org.

https://www.defenddefenders.org/jobs/call-for-applications-program-and-administration-manager/

 

Posted in human rights | Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , ,

Human Rights Defender Ellecer Carlos’ take on Philippines – UN Human Rights Council

July 16, 2019

ABS-CBN News of 16 July 2019 carries an interview with Ellecer Carlos, spokesperson of iDefend or “In Defense of Human Rights and Dignity Movement” under the title: UN rights probe meant to stop ‘would-be tyrants’

Carlos urged the government to exert all means to prevent extrajudicial killings. He said the United Nations Human Rights Council decision to adopt the resolution calling for a report on Manila’s human rights situation, including extrajudicial killings under President Rodrigo Duterte’s war on drugs, is “to stop the mini-Dutertes that are here, the mini mayors that are doing the very same thing, and the Duterte likenesses elsewhere in the world–Sri Lanka, Bangladesh–who have praised Duterte, who have praised the war on drugs here in the Philippines and that is put a stop to would be tyrants employing this violent approach for populist means,“. [see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2019/07/11/un-council-agrees-action-on-philippines-in-spite-of-vehement-objection/]

Carlos, meanwhile, welcomed Foreign Affairs Secretary Teodoro Locsin Jnr’s statement that the Philippines will stay in the United Nations Human Rights Council despite the vote. “This is a good development that they were able to rethink their slip-ups,” Carlos said.

“But I find the statement very funny to teach Europeans and other countries manners. After the unbecoming statements, after the derogatory statements, after the behavior of the Philippine delegation led by Undersecretary [Severo] Catura…. Carlos said the Philippine delegation, led by Undersecretary Catura, walked out during the informal session on June 25 to discuss the Iceland resolution on the Philippines at the 41st session of the UNHRC in Geneva, Switzerland. (Duterte hits Iceland after UNHRC Resolution: ‘You have too much ice’). But the Times of Oman reports that President Rodrigo Duterte is “seriously considering” cutting ties with Iceland (https://timesofoman.com/article/1615850)

https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/07/16/19/un-rights-probe-meant-to-stop-would-be-tyrants-rights-group

Posted in human rights, Human Rights Council, Human Rights Defenders | Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

In memoriam Chinese human rights defender Ji Sizun

July 15, 2019

Undated photo of award-winning Chinese human rights activist Ji Sizun, who died of cancer at 71, weeks after the end of his prison term, July 10, 2019.

Undated photo of award-winning Chinese human rights activist Ji Sizun, who died of cancer at 71, weeks after the end of his prison term, July 10, 2019. Courtesy of an RFA listener.

Award-winning Chinese human rights activist Ji Sizun has died of cancer, pn 10 July 2019 weeks after the end of his prison term. He was 71. Ji, a self-taught legal activist from the southeastern province of Fujian, died of colorectal cancer on Wednesday afternoon at the Zhangzhou Xiangcheng Hospital in Zhangzhou city, his family said.

He had just finished serving a four-and-a-half year jail term for publicly supporting the 2014 pro-democracy movement in Hong Kong, and had been held incommunicado and under close surveillance by the authorities since his “release” in April. His family members were denied permission to visit or speak with him until he was unconscious (!), and Ji’s body was sent directly for cremation after his death by the authorities. His sister said her brother had dedicated his life to human rights work, which was why he had never married. “He would say that his work was too dangerous, so he didn’t want to have a wife and child to care about him.”

Ji’s cancer was diagnosed while he was in prison, and he was offered treatment in a local hospital, according to Ji Zhongjiu, a lawyer who had tried to visit him there.

A source close to the case said Ji’s remains had been handed over to his local neighborhood committee, rather than to his family, sparking suspicions that Ji’s death may not have been entirely due to natural causes. “There are huge question marks over this whole thing … as for the family’s letter entrusting them with this task, the family are very confused about that,” the source said. “The letter was signed on June 12, and Ji suddenly died less than a month after they signed it, so clearly there are suspicions that the authorities have been playing god.” He said the family never wanted Ji to be cremated.

Earlier this year, Ji was awarded the fifth Cao Shunli Memorial Award for Human Rights Defenders, for his contribution in promoting legal rights and education at the grassroots level in China. Cao died in March 2014 after she was denied medical treatment for months while in detention. See: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2019/03/16/human-rights-defender-ji-sizun-in-jail-awarded-5th-cao-shunli-memorial-award-for-human-rights-defenders/

The Chinese authorities should investigate the circumstances and causes of human rights activist Ji Sizun’s death, Human Rights Watch said.

Reported by Gao Feng for RFA’s Mandarin Service, and by Wong Lok-to for the Cantonese Service. Translated and edited by Luisetta Mudie.

https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/activist-death-07102019113636.html

https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/07/10/china-account-activists-death

Posted in awards, HRW, human rights, Human Rights Defenders | 1 Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

NGOs remember 10th Anniversary of Natalia Estemirova’s murder

July 15, 2019
On the 10th anniversary of the murder of Natalia Estemirova, Chechnya’s most prominent human rights defender, nine international and two Russian human rights groups, jointly with FIDH and its member organization, Human Rights Centre “Memorial,” call on the Russian authorities to finally fulfil their obligation to conduct a thorough, impartial and effective investigation into her killing, bring the perpetrators to justice in fair trials before ordinary civilian courts, and end impunity for human rights violations in Chechnya.

[Natalia Estemirova was abducted, apparently by security personnel, near her apartment building in the Chechen capital, Grozny, on the morning of July 15, 2009. Her body was found several hours later in Ingushetia, the neighbouring North Caucasus region, with multiple gunshot wounds. From the early 90s, Natalia Estemirova fearlessly fought injustice in Chechnya. At the start of the second Chechen war in autumn 1999, she began working with Human Rights Center “Memorial” and soon became one of its leading activists. She fearlessly documented egregious abuses, first by the Russian military and police and later, by local Chechen security personnel. Her work brought many atrocities to light, including the Russian ballistic missiles strike on Chechnya’s capital, Grozny, killing over 100 civilians in October 1999, the massacre of dozens of civilians in the Chechen village of Novye Aldy in February 2000, and enforced disappearances, torture, extrajudicial killings, and punitive house-burnings by Chechen law enforcement and security agencies in 2007-2009. In 2008, after she spoke out against the headscarf requirement imposed on women by Chechen authorities, the head of Chechnya, Ramzan Kadyrov, personally threatened her. She also received indirect threats on several occasions, including in the days leading up to her murder. In the last weeks of her life, Estemirova investigated and publicized particularly sensitive cases of abuses by Chechen security officials, including the public execution of Rizvan Albekov in the village of Akhkinchu-Borzoy on July 7, 2009.]

Natalia Estemirova’s brave work was recognized and celebrated through several high-profile awards. She received the “Right to Life” award in 2004 and the European Parliament’s Robert Schuman medal in 2005. In 2007, she received Human Rights Watch’s annual award for extraordinary activism (Alison des Forges). After the murder of her friend, Anna Politkovskaya in 2006, Estemirova was awarded the first RAW in WAR Anna Politkovskaya Award, established in honour of the murdered Russian journalist.

…….

In 2011, FIDH, Novaya Gazeta, and Human Rights Center “Memorial” emphasized in their joint report that the inconsistencies in the official version gave grounds to believe that a cover-up version of the events had been created to avoid investigating possible official involvement in the killing, including that of Chechen security officials. On September 20, 2011, Natalia Estemirova’s relatives lodged a complaint to the European Court of Human Rights about the lack of effective investigation into her murder. The case is pending.

“Memorial” believes that Estemirova’s murder was connected exclusively to her human rights work. Chechen authorities wanted her silenced. The official version, which attributes her killing to insurgents, falls apart on closer examination. Russian authorities must find and punish the perpetrators, including those who ordered the killing,” said Oleg Orlov, head of the Hot Stops program at Human Rights Center “Memorial”.

…

Activists of the Joint Mobile Group of human rights defenders in Chechnya, which played a crucial role in providing legal aid to victims of abuses by local security officials in the years after Estemirova’s murder, were subjected to numerous attacks in 2014-2016. On March 9, 2016, two members of the group and six foreign and Russian journalists traveling to Chechnya were attacked by apparent proxies of Chechen authorities in Ingushetia, near the administrative border with Chechnya. Mobsters, apparently acting on the orders of Chechen authorities, attacked and destroyed the group’s office twice. All of these attacks have been carried out with complete impunity, forcing the group to withdraw from Chechnya due to security concerns. [see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2016/03/17/russia-defenders-attack-closing-office-un-joint-mobile-group-chechnya/]

The efforts made by Chechen authorities to  eradicate human rights work in Chechnya culminated in the criminal case fabricated against the successor of Natalia Estemirova, her friend and colleague Oyub Titiev, who took lead of “Memorial”’s work in Chechnya soon after Estemirova’s death. In January 2018, authorities in Chechnya arrested him on bogus drug possession charges. After 17 months behind bars, Titiev was released on parole in June 2019.[see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2019/06/11/two-welcome-paroles-in-russia-and-zimbabwe-but-justice-is-still-to-be-done/]

https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/07/15/joint-statement-10th-anniversary-natalia-estemirovas-murder-human-rights-groups-call

Posted in awards, FIDH, HRW, human rights, Human Rights Defenders | 3 Comments »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Commission on Unalienable Rights: a more nuanced critique by Moyn

July 14, 2019

On July 12, 2019 Samuel Moyn published in Prospect an rather different, less alarmist approach to the efforts of the US State Department to redefine human rights [https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2019/07/11/trump-marches-on-with-commission-on-unalienable-rights/]. The author [see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2018/04/25/has-the-human-rights-movement-failed-a-serious-critique/] makes the point that, first, it looks like the commission will exercise no real power and second that ‘rights proliferation’ is an entirely mainstream and reasonable concern. He also makes interesting points on the composition of the Commission. Whatever one’s views on this are, the piece is worth reading in its totality:

Michael Brochstein/(Sipa via AP Images – Secretary of State Mike Pompeo speaks at the State Department in Washington.

The announcement by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo that he has formed a new Commission on Unalienable Rights is being cited as one more reason to decry Donald Trump for busting norms and persecuting the worst-off. It is, The New Yorker wrote, an act of “unbelievable hypocrisy” for Trump to wrap himself in the mantle of human rights when he has violated them left and right, laid siege to a liberal international order founded on them, and embraced autocracy the world over.

It’s a natural response, but a closer look at the panel suggests that the criticism ought to fall on the symbolic politics of the commission, and our response needs to involve more than just championing the human rights Trump has been trashing, as if the status quo ante 2016 was working well.

It was remarkable, when Pompeo announced the commission at the State Department, how fulsomely he embraced the whole idea of human rights. It is a testament to the fact that—even under Trump—it is an idea that remains non-negotiable, something leaders must redefine in theory even when others suspect them of betraying it in practice.

Pompeo’s apparent worry, to judge from The Wall Street Journal op-ed he penned the day of the announcement, is what is known as rights “proliferation.” Specifically, he charged that, after the Cold War, rights advocates “turned their energy” to “new categories of rights.”

The commission’s very use of the word “unalienable,” which figured in America’s Declaration of Independence before falling out of general usage, trafficked in a founder fetishism that implied that it is the good old rights that matter, not newfangled ones or new claimants. And Pompeo doubled down on this nostalgia in his repeated shout-outs to 1776, and his admonition not “to discover new principles but to ground our discussion of human rights in America’s founding principles.”

Critics have understandably guessed that the goal is to emphasize religious freedom and free-market principles, treating abortion and LGBT rights as illicit, and possibly economic and social rights too. “In effect,” Masha Gessen wrote, also in The New Yorker, “the new commission will contemplate who is and isn’t human, and who, therefore, possesses inalienable rights.” Fetuses will be accorded rights, and the LGBT community stripped of them.

It’s a reasonable fear and something to watch. But the really significant thing about the commission may lie elsewhere.

For one thing, it looks like the commission will exercise no real power. Critics fear that its true purpose is to make an end run around other parts of the State Department, such as the legal adviser’s office and the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, but those departments are also run by Trump appointees.

For another, rights proliferation is an entirely mainstream and reasonable concern, backed by such august rights thinkers as Baroness Onora O’Neill, a British liberal philosopher and House of Lords member. If everything is a right, nothing is. If there are new rights, it is not obvious the old ones have the same currency. Finally, it is never totally clear what it means to call something a right to begin with—especially since most rights are not intended to function as trumps but rather signal that policymaking somehow ought to take account of the priorities that rights name. These questions will not go away. Indeed, the idea that they are already settled, through appeal to the authority, consensus, and orthodoxy of the human rights movement, resembles the Foundermania in which Pompeo indulged.

None of this means that Trumpian human rights ought not to be treated with alarm. But for now, the international consensus around human rights among transnational experts is simply too strong to allow this commission to magically shift it. Indeed, the response to Pompeo’s announcement, which reportedly surprised Foggy Bottom, proves how weak the commission is likely to be.

For that reason, it is more interesting to focus on what this move says about the conservative movement under Trump and its changing understandings of internationalism. And to understand that, it is critical to shift from Pompeo to the members of the commission he appointed.

“Human rights” have for decades, and for conservatives and liberals alike, described the values America should stand for in global affairs, especially in a world of despots. The founders announced a revolution to that world, but mainly to secure human rights for (some) Americans in their new state. Yet like liberals and conservatives for decades, the commission, originating in the State Department, presumes that human rights are already safe for the domestic politics of the United States, or someone else’s problem. Pompeo is not changing internationalist premise, and has no power as secretary of state to do so.

Before Trump, conservative internationalism has differed from liberal internationalism on details. Conservatives in the Cold War dithered about whether to support autocrats abroad but in the end, after the ascendancy of neoconservatism, embraced “democracy promotion.” As for American liberals, this has led them to idealize America’s global military ascendancy and to support many wars. And like those liberals, after a near miss under Jimmy Carter’s presidency when human rights were born, conservatives have embraced a vision of human rights abroad that ignores economic and social rights like the entitlement to a job or basic necessities—even though they were part of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights that Pompeo also invoked.

It is perfectly legitimate to resist militarism and neoliberalism, central fixtures of U.S. foreign policy for decades on both sides of the aisle. In fact, one might have thought that Trump, who ran as a kind of anti-war candidate playing on the economic stagnation of the rest at the expense of the rich like himself, would have raised doubts about what conservatives and liberals alike have taken human rights to be about. But no. A more debatable path for conservative internationalism is suggested by the commission’s membership.

Led by Mary Ann Glendon, the controversial Harvard Law professor and staunch right-wing Roman Catholic, the most interesting thing about the commission is not its inclusion of some house publicists of the interdenominational religious right, most of whom have (like Glendon) treated the “theocon” magazine First Things as one of their main outlets. Rather, it is the inclusion of others with links to the secular far right, or at least curious about it. Former New Left intellectual Russell Berman, along with his fellow German literature specialist David Tse-Chien Pan, both have spent lots of time working for Telos, the onetime New Left journal that since the 1980s has promoted the thinking of the European far right. As political scientist Joseph Lowndes has written, Telos has a fascinating if small role in the American circles that led to contemporary far-right nationalism.

It is no more than a hint, in short, but the most fascinating thing about the commission’s membership is therefore that it appears to be a laboratory for new collaborations between the religious right and the secular far right. And in particular, it is a setting for experimenting with what the future of conservative internationalism should look like.

If it means, as commission member Peter Berkowitz wrote recently, that “a certain restraint is again crucial to conserving a free and open international order” after decades of promoting human rights abroad the wrong way, that is one thing. But there are other possibilities. If it means a conservative internationalism that, as Quinn Slobodian has argued, actually extends free trade while striving for racially and religiously homogeneous societies, conservative internationalism will look very different.

Ironically, neither the founders nor “natural law”—the favorite concept of several of the religious conservatives on the panel—will help it decide this dilemma on the right, which is the real story of Trump’s presidency when it comes to foreign policy. And much more is at stake than saving human rights from its new defenders in resisting the future conservative internationalism may have in store.

https://prospect.org/article/can-pompeo-redefine-human-rights-trump-era

Posted in human rights | Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

UAE blithely organises short film award on human rights for youth

July 14, 2019
Gulf News (12 July 2019) manages to announce with a straight face that “the fourth edition of the Mansour Bin Mohammad Short Film Award in Dubai is back and UAE’s youth can send their entries until November 7″.

The annual short film award is an initiative by the Community Development Authority (CDA) in Dubai aimed at encouraging creativity and innovation mixing creative media skills and human rights values together…It follows a four-pronged objective: Increase community awareness about human rights; encourage the youth to use their creative skills in highlighting human rights values; develop creative capabilities of the youth in arts, and to establish the values of tolerance, cultural diversity, combating discrimination and extremism among today’s younger generation. ..Maitha Al Shamsi, CEO, Human Rights Sector, CDA, explained that the award has been able to generate key success as an innovative channel that aims to increase awareness of human rights issues while also encouraging young people to express these rights through the use of their creative and artistic skills and talents. Al Shamsi said, “Tolerance has been a long-followed value that the UAE has encouraged since its establishment as a nation. The country is widely known for its promotion of the values of tolerance, peace and respect of others.”

This blog alone shows that there is no such reputation, the opposite: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2019/06/13/political-prisoners-in-the-emirats-are-detained-indefinitely-even-after-release-date/ and many more: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/tag/uae/

https://gulfnews.com/uae/youth-short-film-competition-in-uae-launched-1.65104056

Posted in awards, films | 1 Comment »
Tags: , , , , , ,

The never ending quest for the protection of journalists

July 14, 2019

Media (here the dailysabah of 13 July 2019) have referred to a Global Conference for Media Freedom, co-organized by the British and Canadian foreign ministries. The two-day conference, held at the Printworks event center in London, was joined by over a thousand guests from 100 countries, including journalists, academics, politicians and diplomats. The conference was held to trigger a global initiative to safeguard journalists and fortify global media freedom. Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, who was murdered last October and Maltese journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia, who was killed in a bomb attack in 2017, were widely mentioned and marked by the panelists and participants.

One of the panel discussions placed a lot of importance on efforts to bring to justice those who have killed journalists, review national attempts to resolve cold cases and examine attempts to affect change in U.N. member states to prevent impunity. In addition to these topics and media-government interactions; the increasing relations between the media and investors in digital media also brought about new debates, such as ethical journalism and sustainability of the media.

One of the key proposals of the conference was creating an international judicial committee for journalists which will include judges, lawyers, academics and human rights defenders from all over the world. Also, to reduce pressure against journalists and media on a global scale, prevent journalist murders, attacks, kidnappings and ensure the safety of journalists; a new initiative based on international and civil society pressure to hold the governments accountable is to be created. In my personal opinion I doubt that there is really a need for creating new entities in an area where there are already so many NGOs, coalitions, campaigns and awards, but the severity of the situation perhaps justifies it (2018 was the worst year on record for violence and abuse against journalists – in 2018, at least 99 journalists were killed, a further 348 imprisoned and 60 held hostage. Beyond that, almost 1,000 journalists and media workers have been killed in the past decade. Among them, 93 percent of those killed were local journalists and 7 percent are foreign correspondents).  See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/tag/journalists/

Another finding of the research conducted by these institutions is that the impunity for crimes against journalists remains the norm, with justice in only one in 10 cases.

https://www.dailysabah.com/politics/2019/07/13/murdered-journalists-highlighted-in-global-media-forum-in-london

Posted in Human Rights Defenders | Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

« Older posts
Newer posts »