Archive for the 'human rights' Category

Frequently asked question: how do I become an international human rights lawyer?

April 27, 2013

How do I become an international human rights lawyer? is the topic of an article by Hannah Gannagé-Stewart in the Guardian of Friday 26 April 2013. She rightly starts by stating that “the life of an international human rights lawyer is not all jet setting glamour”. Still, it is one of the most frequent questions put to me at the end of a lecture, often during the reception afterwards under 4 eyes: “I would like to work for human rights – what do you advise me?” is the usual opening line. My half-serious standard reply: “if your really want to work FOR human rights, I advise you to get very rich and donate half your wealth to the human rights movement“, is not always appreciated, but correct at the macro level as the shortage of funds is much more problematic than that of talent and devotion in the human rights movement. The question asked was of course situated at the micro level as in: “I want to work IN human rights (even if the pay is not very good)“.

The Guardian piece (although focusing on the UK) contains good, practical advice and most of it would be valid in other countries:

“Jet-setting round the globe, setting the worlds highest courts alight with spectacular oratory performances, radically changing the lives of the most vulnerable. Hell, theres probably a Nobel peace prize in there somewhere too right? Think again. There are actually very few lawyers who would describe themselves as international human rights lawyers, Read the rest of this entry »

Losing faith in justice system in Thailand – good editorial in Bangkok Post

April 27, 2013

I am re-publishing this excellent editorial that appeared in the Bangkok Post of 25 Apr 2013 about the lack of protection for environmental human rights defenders in Thailand. If only more newspapers carried such succinct and clear opinions:

The rally in front of the Appeal Court on Tuesday by 300 residents from Prachuap Khiri Khan to demand transparency in the murder case of environment defender Charoen Wat-aksorn attracted scant media attention.That is not surprising at all as most mainstream media have lost interest in the case, which has dragged on for almost a decade since the victim’s murder on June 21, 2004, regrettably with justice yet to be served _ at least in the mind of Charoen’s widow, his friends and supporters. It is understandable why these rural residents had to travel from their hometown more than 200 kilometres away to gather in front of the court, albeit in a peaceful and civilised manner, to demonstrate their “reaction” against the courts recent acquittal of the last suspect in Charoen’s murder case, 51-year-old Thanu Hinkaew. Their presence in Bangkok was not meant to protest against the Appeal Courts acquittal but merely to seek an explanation from the court and to ensure the case would be treated with transparency when prosecutors appeal against the verdict to the Supreme Court. Read the rest of this entry »

Bahrain refuses – again – UN Rapporteur on Torture

April 26, 2013

Bahrain’s state news agency reported earlier this week that Juan Méndez, the UNs special rapporteur for torture, had “put off his visit” scheduled for early May following a letter from Salah bin Ali Abdulrahman, Bahrain’s human rights affairs minister. The letter outlined “reasons for the request to postpone the visit”, the agency said. However, Mr Méndez said on Wednesday 24 April (according to the National) that there was no choice in the matter, calling the refusal to play host to his visit “a unilateral decision by the [Bahraini] authorities“. “This is the second time that my visit has been postponed, at very short notice. It is effectively a cancellation, as no alternative dates were proposed, nor is there a future road map to discuss“.

So much for the much-touted Government-commissioned report of 2011 in which the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry found evidence of torture committed by the country’s security forces during a pro-reform uprising and the subsequent Government’s promise to coöperate with the UN to address the issues. Refusal to coöperate may pay again!

via Bahrain shuts out UN torture probe – The National.

 

Russia pursues its policy of labeling human rights defenders as ‘foreign agents’

April 26, 2013

In spite of protests by many NGOs and Governments around the world (including earlier posts in this blog), Russia seems bent on pursuing its idea of requiring all organisations which receive foreign funding and are engaged in political activity to register as ‘foreign agents’ [‘Foreign Agents’ Law of 21 November 2012] . After the passing of the law, GOLOS, Memorial and the Joint Mobile Group (just made the Final Nominee of the MEA 2013) and many other organisations declared that out of principle they would not register as ‘foreign agent’.

Yesterday, 25 April 2013, the Russian election watchdog GOLOS became the first NGO to be fined. The decision was taken by the Presnensky Court of Moscow. GOLOS is a Russian non-profit organisation which was founded in 2000 for the protection of voters’ rights and the development of civil society.  The court found that GOLOS had been receiving foreign funding, thereby implying that it considered the 2012 Andrei Sakharov Freedom Award  as such, despite testimony given by a representative of Norwegian Helsinki Committee who confirmed that GOLOS actually refused to receive the 7700$. The court also found that the advocacy work of GOLOS aimed at the introduction of amendments to the Electoral Code constitute ‘political activity’. The law does not define political activity, the precise definition of which depends on state officials’ interpretation.  The court ruled that GOLOS and its executive director Lilya Shibanova failed to comply with the obligation to register as a ‘foreign agent’ and fined them 300,000 roubles (approximately €7500) and 100,000 roubles (approximately €2500) respectively. They intend to appeal the decision.

And on 24 April Front Line Defenders reported that the Russian NGO ‘Man and the Law’ has been warned under the same Foreign Agents Law. Man and the Law, which is based in the Mari-El Republic in Russia, received a warning from the local Prosecutor’s Office re ‘political activity’, evidence for which has allegedly been found in their Charter and on their website.  Man and the Law is a local non-governmental organisation which monitors local officials’ and civil servants’ compliance with human rights standards. The NGO also works on prisoners’ rights and monitors detention facilities and organises seminars and workshops for local officials, especially from the Federal Penitentiary Service. The warning also states that the latest inspection of the organisation revealed foreign sources of funding, in which case Man and the Law should have registered as a foreign agent.Frontline NEWlogo-2 full version - cropped

Related articles

‘Chinese Human Rights Defenders’ presents itself at Ulaanbaatar Ministerial Conference

April 26, 2013

This is the way the NGO “Chinese Human Rights Defenders” (CDHR) presents itself at the Ministerial Conference of the Community of Democracies in Ulaan Bator, so close to ‘home’:

“Do the names Zhou Decai, Cao Haibo, Chen Wei, Chen Xi or Cui Fufang ring a bell to you? They are all prisoners of conscience in China. The Chinese Human Right Defenders (CHRD) are doing all they can to make the stories of prisoners of consciousness heard.

CHRD

On its website, CHRD defines itself as “a network of Chinese and international activists promoting human rights and empowering rights defenders in China. A non-governmental organization, CHRD provides logistical support and capacity-building services to human rights advocates, monitors human rights developments, and assists victims of human rights abuses. CHRD advocates the peaceful realization of human rights protection through democratization and rule of law reform.”

There are many activities of the network: just to name numerous reports have been published, the last one of them being the “2012 annual report on the situation of human rights in China”; It also submits constant reports and appeals to the UN on the situation of human rights in China, urging it to act for its improvement; their website and Twitter account provide constant updates on human rights violations in China, as well as pictures and videos, with stories which do not usually reach the mainstream media.”

via Chinese Human Rights Defenders- Promoting human rights and empowering grassroots activism in China | Ulaanbaatar Ministerial Conference- Civil Society.

Martin Ennals Award films on You Tube and VIMEO

April 25, 2013

The Martin Ennals Award has from the beginning used film images to portray the work of human rights defenders. Most you can find through http://www.martinennalsaward.org or on:

YOU TUBE: http://www.youtube.com/user/martinennalsaward (the most recent ones but others to follow)

and

VIMEO: https://vimeo.com/martinennalsaward/videos (29 of them)

and the best is to subscribe to these channels so that they alert you when there is something new.

Human Rights Watch urges EU to stand up for human rights in China during Ashton’s visit today

April 25, 2013

(EU) High Representative Catherine Ashton should publicly raise concerns over ongoing and persistent human rights violations in China when she visits Beijing, said Human Rights Watch. “As EU’s top foreign policy official, Ashton cannot ignore the deteriorating human rights environment in China,” said Lotte Leicht, European Union advocacy director. “She needs to make it a central part of her agenda in Beijing.” Ashton should also urge top Chinese officials to stop obstructing Security Council action on Syria, including humanitarian access to all civilians in need, and referring  jurisdiction over war crimes and crimes against humanity to the International Criminal Court.HRW_logo

In recent months the EU has issued strong statements, including ones at the United Nations Human Rights Council, on China’s use of the death penalty and the crisis of self-immolations in Tibet, among other issues.

The EU also provides some support to human rights defenders in China…..Yet, the EU’s engagement on human rights in China has been extremely weak since Ashton was nominated as the EU’s first foreign policy chief. The more than thirty rounds of the official EU-China dialogue on human rights have had little discernible positive effect for those standing up for human rights in China, and at other levels of political dialogue the EU has failed to give human rights and the rule of law a degree of public attention commensurate with the importance of these issues in China…

…Although the new Chinese leadership has expressed rhetorical support for reform on some key human rights concerns, such as re-education through labor, abuses remain rampant throughout the country. The Chinese government denies people the full exercise of basic rights such as freedom of expression, association, and religion, and systematically suppresses dissidents and human rights activists…

Ashton should be prepared to tell her Chinese government interlocutors who speak of the need for reform that a good start would be freeing Liu Xiaobo and lifting the appalling and abusive house arrest imposed on Liu Xia,” said Leicht.

Even the new leadership’s commitment to robustly grappling with rampant corruption – identified as a high priority – is already being called into question. In early April, eight activists were arrested for their involvement in a grass-roots anti-corruption campaign.

China: EU Commitments Demand Tough Response | Human Rights Watch.

Freedom House celebrates EU Human Rights Defender Award for Ugandan journalist but with some exaggeration

April 25, 2013

 

(Photo credit: HRNJ-Uganda website)

Freedom House got carried away a bit when it published the following:

Freedom House would like to congratulate Ugandan human rights activist Geoffrey Wokulira Ssebaggala, on being awarded the European Union Human Rights Defender Award for the year 2012.  Ssebaggala is one of the founding members of the Human Rights Network for Journalists-Uganda (HRNJ-Uganda) and has been its National Coordinator since 2009. He was honored for his efforts in defending media rights, recording and highlighting restrictions on freedom of expression and access to information, as well as attacks on journalists. Ssebaggala is certainly a most deserved winner, but when Freedom House states: “The European Union established the award to raise awareness about the work of individual human rights defenders (HRDs) around the world. [emphasis added]” it exaggerates quite a bit as is made clear by the EU delegation in Kampala in 2011 when it created the purely national award  http://www.deluga.ec.europa.eu/index.php/delegation-activities-in-uganda/political-press-information/press-and-info/news-releases/182-new-new-new-eu-local-hrd-awards-nominations.

IFEX at the end of its congratulatory piece at least recognises the local character of the award. http://www.ifex.org/uganda/2013/04/24/award_freedom/

Freedom House Grantee Receives the European Union Human Rights Defender Award | Freedom House.

Macedonia: Threats and violent attack against LGBTI rights defenders in Macedonia (FYROM)

April 24, 2013

On 20 April 2013, human rights defenders from the Association of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender People ‘LGBT United’ and the Coalition for Sexual and Health Rights of Marginalized Communities were attacked by seven unknown persons in the city of Bitola, while putting up posters advocating for the human rights of LGBTI people and marching peacefully carrying a rainbow flag.

 

Rainbow flag (LGBT movement) LGBT (lesbian, ga...

 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

The attack took place in front of the Diamond Hostel, in Bitola, down which the human rights defenders had just walked. They were first set upon by four unknown persons, who were later joined by three more. The human rights defenders were insulted, spat on and hit in the face and head. Their posters were taken, and when one of the human rights defenders took his phone to call for help, the phone was also taken and he was told he would be killed. The attack was reported to the police.

 

Since the attack took place, insulting messages and threats, including death threats, have been posted on LGBT United’s Facebook page, specifically directed at the LGBT United’s members who were attacked in Bitola. The threatening messages included the following: “if you are stupid enough to come to Bitola again … be sure that you will end up in a hospital with your bones broken, and some might end up in a graveyard”, “Kill and slaughter a fag” and “you deserve to die”. On 22 April 2013, photos portraying members of the LGBT United were posted on the Facebook page of the Macedonian Sports Fans group, along with further threatening messages.

 

Frontline NEWlogo-2 full version - croppedis deeply concerned for the safety of human rights defenders affiliated with these organisations.

 

Annual Report 2013 of the Observatory focuses on the issue of funding of NGOs

April 24, 2013
OMCT-LOGO
logo FIDH_seul
In its  2013  Annual Report, the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders focuses on a new setback impeding the work of human rights defenders. Access to funding, in particular foreign funding, is increasingly being hindered by governments, whose primary intentions are to silence human rights defenders. The Report of the Observatory, a joint programme of the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) and the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), provides a global review of the violations of NGOs’ right to funding via various forms of restrictions imposed by States. It provides a detailed picture of this as yet insufficiently studied problem. This analysis is illustrated by concrete cases in 35 countries.
As also highlighted by Maina Kiai, United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Rights to Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and of Association, in the Foreword to the Report, “The topic of this year’s Report is most pertinent as lately we have witnessed increased stigmatization and undue restrictions in relation to access to funding and resources for civil society organizations, in an attempt to stifle any forms of criticism […]”.
Based on the legal framework surrounding the right to access to funding and the embryonic jurisprudence on this subject, the Report seeks to foster an in-depth analysis of the negative impacts of these restrictive measures, and addresses recommendations to all stakeholders – beneficiaries, donors, governments and intergovernmental organisations.
Two of the three Final Nominees of the MEA this year (in Egypt and Russia) have to deal with these kind of restrictions.

For those who missed the publication when announced in February: Annual Reports : OBS Annual Report 2013: Violations of the right … – FIDH.