Francisco Vera, is 13 years old and he has been advocating for human rights and climate justice since he was 9 years old.
Archive for the 'OHCHR' Category
13-year old HRD from Colombia cares for climate
July 19, 2023Results of 53rd session of the UN Human Rights Council as seen by NGOs
July 19, 2023Over a dozen organisations share reflections on the key outcomes of the 53rd session of the UN Human Rights Council, as well as the missed opportunities to address key issues and situations. A shortened version was delivered at the Council. [see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2023/06/20/human-rights-defenders-issues-at-the-53rd-session-of-the-un-human-rights-council/]
We welcome the resolution put forward by the OIC to ensure the full implementation of the United Nations database of businesses facilitating Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory as well as the recent publication of the partial update to the database issued by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on 30 June 2023. The effectiveness and credibility of the HRC and OHCHR has suffered considerably from the chronic under-implementation of the database by this Council. The resolution put forward at the 53rd session represents an important step forward, and it is crucial that future updates are conducted annually, regularly, including both the addition and removal of businesses from the database, as appropriate, to ensure accurate and comprehensive information for all stakeholders involved. We regret that some States failed to vote in favor of the resolution to ensure the full implementation of the database. We believe this failure constitutes a dangerous example of double standards and urge States who abstained or voted against the resolution to begin to approach this issue in line with international human rights standards and their duties as UN member States.
We welcome the fact that the resolution on civil society space addressed the limitations to civil society access and participation in decision-making processes, including at the UN, and called on States to “enable and institutionalize meaningful online participation in hybrid meetings” and to establish “a transparent, fair and gender-responsive accreditation processes”. We welcome that the resolution acknowledges the significant role played by civil society in the promotion and protection of human rights, including with regard to monitoring, documenting and raising awareness about human rights violations and abuses, but we regret that the role of civil society in the prevention of human rights violations, as well as the Council’s prevention mandate, was not highlighted. We also welcome that the resolution emphasizes undue restrictions of civic space, including on funding of civil society actors, nonetheless we express concern that it does not address the misuse of restrictive laws in a more comprehensive manner. We appreciate the call upon States to establish or enhance information-gathering and monitoring mechanisms, including by benefiting from data collected by civil society, for the collection, analysis and reporting of data on threats, attacks or violence against civil society, and the request to the High Commissioner to prepare a report identifying challenges and best practices in regularly assessing civic space trends drawing on the views of civil society, amongst others. This may lead, in the longer term, to the development of a collective methodology including indicators and benchmarks that will permit the effective and systematic monitoring of civic space developments on the international level. We also call on States to prevent the deterioration and closure of civic space and provide support to build civil society resilience.
We welcome the focus of the resolution on human rights of migrants on human rights violations in transit. However, the resolution fails to answer the call from over 220 CSOs for the Council to establish an investigative mechanism on deaths, torture and other grave human rights violations at and around international borders. The focus on monitoring in the intersessional panel requested must be used as a stepping stone towards a response from the Council that matches the severity of the situation. The 53rd session opened as yet another horrific incident unfolded with hundreds presumed dead at sea. The normalisation of deaths caused by border management policies and practices, as well as criminal networks, must end. It is unclear what scale of atrocity will prompt this body to act.
We welcome the adoption of resolutions on child and early forced marriage and on violence against women and girls, despite hostile amendments contravening international human rights law, UN technical guidance and WHO Guidelines. The resolution on child and early forced marriage on the theme of forced marriage, identifies root causes of forced marriage and calls for practical guidelines to be developed by the OHCHR which can help States work to prevent and eliminate forced marriage, centering the autonomy of women and girls. The resolution on violence against women and girls looks at systemic violence against women and girls in criminal detention systems. The resolution centers the respect, protection and fulfillment of human rights for women and girls in criminal detention, in addition to the Bangkok and Mandela Rules.
We welcome the adoption of the resolution on ‘the impact of arms transfer on human rights‘. Ensuring arms related risks to human rights continues to be part of the Council’s work is critical – both those acquired by civilians and those transferred. We look forward to the stocktaking intersessional workshop on the role of States and the private sector in preventing, addressing and mitigating negative human rights impacts of arms transfers.
We welcome the resolution on new and emerging digital technologies, which reinforces the need to respect, protect and promote human rights throughout the lifecycle of artificial intelligence systems. The resolution mandates an enhanced role of the OHCHR in providing its expertise on the human rights implications of these technologies, including artificial intelligence, to other UN bodies, mechanisms, and processes. We believe that bolstering this existing expertise is vital in ensuring a consistent human rights-first approach to the growing number of UN initiatives relevant to this topic. We also particularly welcome that the resolution stresses that certain applications of artificial intelligence “present an unacceptable risk to human rights”. We now call on States to put this language into practice and ban those technologies that cannot be operated in compliance with international human rights law.
We welcome the adoption of the resolution extending the mandate of the UN Special Rapporteur on Independence of Judges and Lawyers for three years.
We regret the adoption of a new resolution on countering religious hatred constituting incitement to discrimination hostility or violence. While we are dismayed over the rise of hate against persons on the basis of their religion or belief worldwide, this resolution ultimately aims to protect not individuals but rather religious books and symbols that do not enjoy protection under international human rights law. We note that prohibitions on the defamation of religions fuel division and religious intolerance by shutting down interfaith dialogue, and can facilitate human rights violations against religious minorities. While the burning of holy books is considered disrespectful and offensive by many, this is not an act of incitement in and of itself, and such acts should only be challenged through open space for dialogue, debate, and dissent. By evoking language on the defamation of religions, this resolution puts over a decade of progress in jeopardy and risks undermining the consensual, positive action plan to combat religious intolerance achieved in landmark Resolution 16/18 in 2011.
We regret that the resolution on the contribution of development to the enjoyment of human rights weakens the interdependence of human rights and sustainable development. We reiterate deep concerns at the long-term goal of this initiative, in light of the penholder’s remarks during negotiations that the ‘contribution of development to human rights’ is a methodology ‘conflicting with’ human rights-based approaches to development (HRBA) widely-endorsed by the Secretary-General, UN agencies and States. We regret the inclusion of undefined domestic concepts such as ‘better life’, ‘high-quality development’ and ‘people-centred approach to development’, and the failure to consider middle-ground proposals to reallocate resources to meet the OHCHR’s needs for additional capacity on HRBA to development. We lament that the penholder disregarded strong concerns shared across all regions, including from developing countries as reflected in the abstentions of Costa Rica, Chile, Georgia, India and Paraguay, despite commitments to seek consensus and engage constructively.
We welcome the adoption of the resolution on Belarus, which re-mandates the Special Rapporteur for a further year. The Special Rapporteur on Belarus remains critical to civil society, whose options for seeking redress for human rights violations at an international level were further reduced recently when Belarus withdrew from the First Optional Protocol of the ICCPR.
We welcome the adoption of the resolution presented by Colombia seeking to enhance technical cooperation to implement the recommendations made by the Commission for the Clarification of Truth, Coexistence and Non-Repetition in the country – a resolution looking towards a future of peace.. The text highlights the OHCHR report’s findings that violence disproportionately affects, inter alia, human rights defenders, Indigenous Peoples, people of African descent, peasant leaders, women and girls, as well as persons on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender identity. We regret however that Pakistan, on behalf of the OIC except Albania, tabled an amendment to remove the reference to ‘sexual orientation and gender identity’, and in doing so did not respect Colombia’s decision to acknowledge the vulnerability of populations inside its own territory, and meant that a vote was called on the resolution.
This year’s strengthened resolution on Eritrea is in line with civil society’s ask to substantively address violations Eritrean authorities commit at home and abroad and to move beyond merely procedural resolutions that extend the Special Rapporteur’s mandate. We encourage States to go even further next year and to reinstate fully substantive resolutions on Eritrea’s human rights situation, as was the rule before 2019.
We welcome the adoption of the Item 10 resolution on Ukraine, maintaining the Council’s regular dialogues with the High Commissioner on the human rights situation in Ukraine. The work of the OHCHR in Ukraine is critical, complementary to the work of the International Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine, and it is important that HRC is kept abreast of this work.
While we believe the resolution on Rohingya and other minorities in Myanmar is an important step to maintain the situation of Rohingya and other minorities in Myanmar high on the agenda of the Council, we regret that the resolution failed to reflect the reality of the situation on the ground in Myanmar especially following the 1 February 2021 military coup. It calls for immediate commencement of repatriation of Rohingya refugees in direct contrast to conclusions and recommendations of the Special Rapporteur, the High Commissioner as well as Rohingya themselves that conditions for safe, voluntary, dignified and sustainable return for Rohingya do not exist in Myanmar, and that their return under the current circumstances could lead to the recurrence of violence that led to their displacement.
The holding of a Special Session on Sudan on 11 May 2023, does not preclude, but rather should be seen as the start of a process toward, stronger resolutions. Civil society will continue to push for the establishment of an investigative mechanism, which is the least the Council can do for the victims and survivors of the conflict and violations and abuses committed in the country in the last three decades. We highlight the need for a holistic, comprehensive response by the international community. In this regard, the Final Communiqué of the First Meeting of the IGAD Quartet Group of Countries for the Resolution of the Situation in the Republic of Sudan resolved to request that “the East Africa Standby Force (EASF) summit … convene in order to consider the possible deployment of the EASF for the protection of civilians and guarantee humanitarian access” and committed “to work closely with the international community to put in place a robust monitoring and accountability mechanism that will be instrumental in bringing perpetrators to justice.”
We deplore the sustained failure of this Council to respond meaningfully to the human rights situation in China, gradually undermining its credibility and ability to scrutinise countries on the basis of objective, impartial UN documentation, including the OHCHR Xinjiang report. We further regret the failure of the joint UN Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect to act in line with its mandate on the CERD’s historic referral of the situation in Xinjiang, weakening the UN’s genocide-prevention architecture. The CESCR, the CEDAW, the CERD, the OHCHR, the ILO, as well as Special Procedures through three joint statements, nearly 30 press releases and 100 letters to the government since 2018, have provided more than sufficient evidence pointing to systematic and widespread human rights violations. So long as the Council is not able to take principled action on the basis of objective criteria, other powerful perpetrators will feel empowered to continue committing atrocity crimes, relying on the Council’s silence. We reiterate our pressing call for all Council Members to support the adoption of a resolution establishing a UN mandate to monitor and report on the human rights situation in China.
We regret that the Council failed to adequately respond to the situation in Egypt. Since the joint statement delivered by States in March 2021 at the Council , there has been no significant improvement in the human rights situation in Egypt despite the launching of the national human rights strategy and the national dialogue. The Egyptian government has failed to address, adequately or at all, the repeated serious concerns expressed by several UN Special Procedures over the broad and expansive definition of “terrorism”, which enables the conflation of civil disobedience and peaceful criticism with “terrorism”. The Human Rights Committee raised its concerns “that these laws are used, in combination with restrictive legislation on fundamental freedoms, to silence actual or perceived critics of the Government, including peaceful protesters, lawyers, journalists, political opponents and human rights defenders”. Egyptian and international civil society organisations have been calling on the Council to establish a monitoring and reporting mechanism on the human rights situation in Egypt, applying objective criteria and in light of the Egyptian government’s absolute lack of genuine will to acknowledge, let alone address, the country’s deep-rooted human rights crisis.
We regret the Council’s repeated failure to address the situation in India including to exercise its prevention mandate in relation to the potential escalation of violence against religious minorities and Dalits and Adivasis into mass atrocity crimes with unchecked hate speech and incitement to violence by Hindu nationalist leaders, the most recent illustration of which is the ongoing communal violence in the Northeastern state of Manipur. We remind the Council that this is happening in the context of systematic rollback of fundamental freedoms, the rule of law and independent institutions as well as the ongoing criminalisation, harassment and intimidation of human rights defenders, activists, journalists, and dissidents, and targeting of civil society organisations using national security and counter-terrorism infrastructure. Silence of the Council further enables impunity and makes the international community complicit.
We regret that the Council failed to adequately respond to the situation in Saudi Arabia. In light of the ongoing diplomatic rehabilitation of crown prince and de facto ruler Mohammed bin Salman, the Saudi authorities’ brazen repression continues to intensify, as ALQST has documented. Some notable recent trends include, but are not limited to: the further harsh sentencing of activists for peaceful social media use, such as women activists Salma al-Shehab (27 years), Fatima al-Shawarbi (30 years and six months) and Sukaynah al-Aithan (40 years); the ongoing detention of prisoners of conscience beyond the expiry of their sentences, some of whom continue to be held incommunicado such as human rights defenders Mohammed al-Qahtani and Essa al-Nukheifi, and; regressive developments in relation to the death penalty, including a wave of new death sentences passed and a surge in executions (47 individuals were executed from March-May 2023), raising concerns for those currently on death row, including several young men at risk for crimes they allegedly committed as minors. We call on the Council to respond to the calls of NGOs from around the world to create a monitoring and reporting mechanism on the ever-deteriorating human rights situation in Saudi Arabia.
We regret that the Council failed to exercise its prevention mandate and address the deteriorating human rights situation in Tunisia. Civil society organizations, the High Commissioner and UN Special Procedures all have raised alarm at the escalating pattern of human rights violations and the rapidly worsening situation in Tunisia following President Kais Saied’s power grab on 25 July 2021 leading to the erosion of the rule of law, attacks on the independence of the judiciary, reprisals against independent judges and lawyers and judges associations, a crackdown on peaceful political opposition and abusive use of “counter-terrorism” law in politicized prosecutions, as well as attacks on freedom of expression and threats to freedom of association. A wave of arrests that started in February 2022 continued to include at least 40 members of peaceful political opposition. On 21 February 2023, President Saied made inflammatory comments that triggered a wave of anti-Black violence and persecution – including assaults and summary evictions – against Black African foreign nationals, including migrants, asylum seekers and refugees. Between February and early March 2023, police indiscriminately arrested at least 850 Black African foreign nationals, apparently based on racial profiling. Since July 2, 2023 Tunisian security forces collectively expelled several hundreds of Black African migrants and asylum-seekers to the Tunisian-Libyan borders without any due process, along with reports of beatings and sexual assaults. The High Commissioner has addressed the deteriorating situation in the three latest global updates to the HRC. Special Procedures issued at least 8 communications in less than one year addressing attacks against the independence of the judiciary, as well as attacks against freedom of expression and assembly. Despite the fact that in 2011 Tunisia extended a standing invitation to all UN Special Procedures, and received 16 visits by UN Special Procedures since, Tunisia’s recent postponement of the visit of the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, is another sign of Tunisia disengaging from international human rights mechanisms and declining levels of cooperation.
Signatories: International Service for Human Rights (ISHR), Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies, Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA), International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI), International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, Center for Reproductive Rights, DefendDefenders (East and Horn of Africa Human Rights Defenders Project), Gulf Centre for Human Rights.
https://ishr.ch/latest-updates/hrc53-civil-society-presents-key-takeaways-from-human-rights-council/
Cash-strapped Volker Türk pleads for more funds
May 31, 2023
Volker Türk speaking to journalists after a press briefing at the Palais des Nations in Geneva, 24 May 2023. (Geneva Solutions/Paula Dupraz-Dobias)
Gabriela Galindo on 24 May 2023 in Geneva Solutions reports that Volker Türk said that $800 million are needed yearly, noting rich nations are quick to splurge when it comes to banks or the military, but not ‘when it comes to people’.
Dire humanitarian crises are piling up across the world, yet the United Nations’ human rights watchdog is still strapped for cash, its chief warned Wednesday.
The Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) has its hands full as it races to respond to the human rights impacts of climate-driven and manmade disasters, state-sponsored discrimination and full-out conflict, its chief, Volker Türk, told a press conference in Geneva. See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2022/09/15/new-high-commissioner-for-human-rights-volker-turk-the-man-for-an-impossible-job/
But as these parallel crises continue to flare and some spiral, Türk warned that his organisation was running on empty and chided global leaders for not taking human rights funding more “seriously”.
“The needs have exponentially increased, but there isn’t the commensurate funding available on the humanitarian front – that’s just the reality,” he said. “And, unfortunately, that trend has been there for quite a number of years.”
“We have this combination of protracted conflict situations; we have the increase in new and emerging crises and [in] both non-international armed conflict and international armed conflict,” he said, referring to the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Responding to a question on their funding needs, the UN rights chief said he “would want to see a doubling, which would be about $800 million per year, for the organisation”s
Türk addressed a grim roster of situations currently followed by the OHCHR, where human rights were being trampled on amid active armed conflicts, including in Sudan and Ukraine, or at the hands of authoritarian governments in Myanmar and Iran.
In Sudan, he said that the “senseless” fighting between two generals vying for power had civilians “besieged” as ceasefires were broken and added that his office had documented at least 25 cases of sexual violence…
The high commissioner slammed policies stripping women and girls of their rights in Afghanistan and those criminalising LGBTQ+ communities in Uganda. He also pointed to Beijing’s crackdown against human rights defenders as a sign of “shrinking civic space” in China.
Türk added that he was “deeply troubled by the growing phenomenon of anti-rights movements” targeting asylum seekers in the US and Europe as “hateful narratives against migrants and refugees also continue to proliferate”, spurring “anti-migrant” laws and policies that undermine basic human rights and international refugee laws.
“The developments that are unfolding in various countries including the United Kingdom, the US, Italy, Greece and Lebanon are particularly concerning,” he said, as they “appear designed” to hinder the right to seek asylum, to penalise citizens for assisting those in need or to organise returns in “unlawful, undignified and unsustainable ways”.
“We have some [crises] in the headlines all the time, but others are not. Haiti is a good example. There seems to be (…) no sense of urgency when it comes to dealing with a situation like this.”..
“When you look at how quickly billions can be made available when there is a banking crisis or and – I’m sure, rightly so – including military expenditure and so forth… when it comes to people and the plight of people, there doesn’t seem to be the same,” he said.
“Donor countries, they have a budget for peace and security, they have a budget for development (…) but they don’t actually have a budget down for human rights,” he said. “It is actually important to take human rights seriously, not just by (…) coming to the [UN Human Rights] Council and having all these discussions here and working with us, but also by having and increasing the funding for the organisation.”
Human rights defenders against modern slavery
May 30, 2023Mariana de la Fuente, is a human rights defender who fights against slave labour and human trafficking in Brazil. According to ILO, more than 57,000 workers in Brazil were rescued in conditions similar to slavery – between 2003 to 2021.
China and Russia Fail to Defund UN Human Rights Work
February 23, 2023On 14 February, 2023 Louis Charbonneau, HRW United Nations Director, reported that the UN General Assembly achieved a funding breakthrough by agreeing to fully fund UN human rights mechanisms that China, Russia, and their allies had sought to defund in the 2023 budget. All these efforts failed. The Czech Republic as European Union president countered by proposing full funding for human rights mechanisms at the level proposed by Secretary-General António Guterres. The resolution passed by a sizable majority.
There’s more good news. Not only did the defunding efforts fail, but the highly problematic recommendations put forward by the UN Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions were rejected. The Advisory Committee is supposed to be an independent body of experts, but in recent years, its “experts” from countries like China and Russia have been pushing their governments’ anti-human rights agendas and advocating for sharp cuts in funding for human rights work, with no good reasons. Due to divisions between western countries and developing states, the standard UN funding compromise had become accepting the non-binding Advisory Committee recommendations. For example, if its recommendations had been adopted, the staff and budget for the Iran commission of inquiry would have been cut in half.
This should set a precedent for UN human rights funding in the future.
https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/02/14/china-and-russia-fail-defund-un-human-rights-work
Short message from the new High Commissioner for Human Rights: Volker Turk
October 18, 2022On 17 October 2022 Volker Türk begun his mandate as the 8th UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.
Applications for Frank Jennings Fellowship at Front Line Defenders now open
October 17, 2022The Frank Jennings Fellowship 2021/2022 [see https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2018/03/29/new-frank-jennings-fellowship-with-front-line/] is now open for applications.
The Fellow will spend three and a half months in the Front Line Defenders office in Dublin where they will be trained in relation to Human Rights Defenders; the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders; the Mandate of the UN Special Rapporteur; the procedures and methodology of the mandate; the role of Front Line Defenders and other national and international organisations in the support and protection of Human Rights Defenders. The Fellow will then enter an internship programme at the OHCHR and will move to Geneva for a period of six months before returning to Front Line Defenders for a further three months.
The successful candidate will have excellent drafting skills and a proven ability of synthesising and condensing large amounts of information into succinct briefings. They will also have excellent administrative skills. They will have some knowledge of the UN system and international and human rights law. They must have native or native-level English and fluency in Spanish (please note we can’t make exceptions to the language requirements). They will be a recent university graduate (see note below).
Basic Terms of reference – Front Line Defenders Dublin
- Provide support to Front Line Defenders’ Protection Coordinators including dealing with routine queries and correspondence with human rights defenders;
- Cooperate closely with the Regional Fellows and Protection Coordinators in drafting urgent appeals on behalf of human rights defenders at risk around the world:
- Input HRD-related information on the Front Line Defenders database;
- Undertake clerical tasks such as data entry, collating, emailing and maintenance of the database;
- Support follow-up on cases taken up by Front Line Defenders or other specific projects relating to Human Rights Defenders as requested;
- Draft as requested, minutes, briefings, reports, appeals;
Basic Terms of Reference – Geneva SR
- Gather information on the situation of human rights defenders around the world (with a particular focus on themes of concern identified by the SR);
- In coordination with other thematic mechanisms and with geographic desk officers, and under the supervision of the HRD assistant to the SR, draft urgent appeals and communications to Governments concerning human rights violations against human rights defenders;
- Support follow-up of cases;
- Analyse replies received from Governments and prepare summaries for inclusion in the annual Human Rights Council (HRC) report;
- Assist in the drafting of annual reports to the HRC and the General Assembly;
Assist in the preparation of background materials for official missions by the Special Rapporteur; - Assist in liaising with non-governmental organizations for the smooth implementation of the mandate, as needed.
Whilst in Geneva, OHCHR internship regulations will apply.
Honorarium: €1400 per month Dublin and €1700 per month Geneva.
Please note that in order to comply with OHCHR internship regulations, applicants will need to be currently enrolled in university or have graduated from university no more than one year previous to beginning the OHCHR internship.
https://www.frontlinedefenders.org/en/frank-jennings-fellowship-dublin-and-geneva
New High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Turk – the man for an impossible job?
September 15, 2022On 23 June 2022 Marc Limon, Executive Director of the Universal Rights Group posted a Blog: “Time to ask again: is being the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights an impossible job?”
In February 2018, he published a blog on the early departure of the previous High Commissioner for Human Rights, Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein. The blog responded to David Petrasek’s article in OpenGlobaRights, entitled ‘Another one bites the dust’ (8 February 2018).
Limon argues that the High Commissioner position is, in fact, several jobs rolled into one. The mandate of the High Commissioner and his/her Office comprises inter alia:
- Monitoring and speaking out about human rights violations around the world – ‘preventing the continuation of human rights violations throughout the world,’ (OP4f of GA resolution 48/141 of 7 January 1994).
- Acting as the Secretariat to the ‘competent bodies of the United Nations system in the field of human rights and [making] recommendations to them,’ (OP4b of GA res. 48/141).
- Providing capacity building, advisory services and technical assistance, at the request of the State concerned, ‘with a view to supporting actions and programs in the field of human rights,’ (OP4d, GA res. 48/141).
- Engaging in human rights diplomacy (‘dialogue’) with governments and ‘enhanc[ing] international cooperation,’ in order to promote the implementation of international human rights obligations and commitments, and respect for human rights, (OP4g, OP5h, GA res. 48/141).
- Coordinating human rights mainstreaming across the UN system, (OP4i, GA res. 48/141).
- Making recommendations and driving efforts to ‘rationalize, adapt, strengthen and streamline the United Nations machinery in the field of human rights with a view to improving its efficiency and effectiveness,’ (OP4j, GA res. 48/141).
It is clear that, when held in the hands of a single human being, these different parts of the High Commissioner’s overall mandate operate in tension and are, perhaps, even mutually incompatible…
Is it possible for one person to wear all these hats at the same time? Can a single person publicly criticise States in one breath, then in the next reach out to them to forge agreement on reform of the UN human rights system or to provide human rights technical assistance?
Petrasek has made no secret of his belief (apparently shared by the UN Secretary-General, Antonio Guterres) that Zeid over-prioritised human rights monitoring and public advocacy, to the detriment of almost all other parts of his mandate. Yet for many other civil society representatives in Geneva and for many Western diplomats, this singlemindedness (together with Zeid’s natural eloquence) made the former High Commissioner something of a cult hero and the perfect High Commissioner,
Fast forward four and a half years and Zeid replacement as High Commissioner, the former President of Chile Michelle Bachelet, has also fallen on her sword – yet for precisely the opposite reasons as Zeid.
Bachelet was handpicked by Guterres to mark a clear break from Zeid by pursuing a more holistic and balanced approach to the role and mandate of the High Commissioner. In addition to public advocacy Bachelet tried to emphasise human rights diplomacy, international cooperation, support for the international human rights machinery, a focus on emerging thematic human rights concerns (e.g., climate change, the right to a healthy environment, prevention, digital technology), and the on-the-ground delivery of technical assistance and capacity-building support.
In truth, the world needs a High Commissioner Zeid and a High Commissioner Bachelet. The question is: is that possible? Maybe other solutions might be considered? Might, perhaps, the High Commissioner focus on public advocacy, and the Deputy High Commissioner on the more cooperation-orientated aspects of the mandate? Maybe different Deputies could be appointed for each of the main ‘baskets’ of the High Commissioner’s overall mandate? Or maybe the parts of the mandate related to the human rights machinery could be ‘spun off’ – for example, into a new position of secretary-general of the Human Rights Council and its mechanisms, and of the Treaty Bodies?
These are difficult and sensitive questions, and yet it is surely important that they be asked and considered now rather than later. Perhaps today, as the Secretary-General ponders the appointment of the next High Commissioner, is an opportune moment to do so?
On September 7, 2022, the UN announced Secretary-General António Guterres’ decision to appoint Volker Türk, an Austrian national, to replace Michelle Bachelet.
Reactions were swift, most of them expressing the need for action, e.g. “The new UN high commissioner for human rights should neither seek nor expect a honeymoon period from UN member states,” said Tirana Hassan, interim executive director of Human Rights Watch on 8 September “What’s needed by the millions of people around the world whose rights are being violated every day is an advocate in their corner who will take on abusive governments large and small without fear and without hesitation.”
Yoni Ish-Hurwitz, Executive Director of Human Rights Likeminded Office was invited by the Universal Human Rights Group on 12 September, 2022, to contribute a Blog `’Who is Volker Türk?’:
Opinions have already begun forming about Volker Türk in the short time since the announcement of his appointment last week as the new UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. However, in the absence of a public competition, there was little opportunity to learn about Türk. He is also not well-known outside of the UN (and had few followers on twitter until last week). Therefore, in the absence of personal familiarity, it may be useful to focus on his biography, body of work and statements. This would lead to a better understanding of why he was selected for this role. [DISCLAIMER; I happen to know him personally from my days in UNHCR. He has always struck me as an honest and dedicated person with a pronounced interest in the human rights side of refugee work.]
Central to Türk’s biography is his long professional relationship with the Secretary-General Antonio Guterres. They worked together at UNHCR when Guterres led the agency as High Commissioner for Refugees. When Guterres became UN Secretary-General, Türk joined him in New York, to serve as Assistant Secretary-General for Strategic Coordination in the Executive Office. Guterres promoted him in January, to the rank of Under-Secretary-General for Policy, also in the Executive Office, perhaps setting him up to take the role of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.
Having a close confidant as the High Commissioner may be especially important for the Secretary-General at present, considering the significant current political challenges he faces. This is especially the case in the aftermath of the release of the long-awaited report on Xinjiang by the former High Commissioner, Michelle Bachelet. She spared Türk the need to continue holding this hot potato. However, China won’t let Türk off the hook, and will likely exert pressure on him, as it has done with Bachelet, to carefully weigh his words and the way he manages his Office’s work on China. In the meantime, Chen Xu, the Permanent Representative of China in Geneva, announced that ‘the Office closed the door of cooperation by releasing the so-called assessment.’ This means that this is one political crisis that will not end with Bachelet’s departure.
One key question is whether the new High Commissioner will prioritise engagement over speaking truth to power. Bachelet was criticised of doing just that following her recent statements on China, until she released her report at the 11th hour on the job. .. On the face of it, it may appear that Guterres selected a diplomat, rather than an advocate. Türk is a UN career officer through and through, and as such he is in a better position to offer ‘good offices,’ as the UN does, compared to any former Head of State that could have taken the High Commissioner’s post. Among his predecessors were two presidents, two supreme court judges, one foreign minister and one permanent representative to the UN headquarters. However, every day before walking into his new office, the face that Türk will see first is that of his predecessor Sérgio Vieira de Mello, who also spent most of his career in UNHCR. He was commemorated in a bust at the entrance to Palais Wilson, four years after his death in a bombing at UN headquarters in Iraq.
Türk worked in the UN refugee agency for over 30 years, including in the field. Coming from within the UN system is an asset for navigating organisational politics, fostering collaboration with other parts of the UN, enhancing the contribution of OHCHR to all relevant UN fora, and understanding how to engage with Member States to address the situation of the most vulnerable people. His intimate understanding of the UN system is manifested in two major initiatives he stewarded – the Secretary-General’s flagship report, Our Common Agenda, as well as the Secretary-General’s Call to Action for Human Rights. This may not be the place to analyse their successes or shortcomings, but it can be said that they were both well-received. Our Common Agenda offered a vision for mobilising the UN to address global challenges. OHCHR needs a manager with this kind of foresight to grasp the organisation’s structure, programmes and needs. The second initiative, the Call to Action for Human Rights, identified areas for action to advance human rights. As High Commissioner, perhaps Türk will be in a better position to support the implementation of the Call to Action.
This work demonstrates deep engagement on human rights. His legal background, holding a doctorate in international law, will support his role as an advocate. He can substantively articulate concerns and uphold norms based in international human rights law, humanitarian law and refugee law. He certainly appears as an advocate on twitter (@volker_turk). His tweets show his compassion, as he mostly addresses human rights concerns, with people at the centre.
Civil society was concerned about the selection process. Phil Lynch, Executive Director of the International Service for Human Rights (ISHR), said: ‘The lack of transparency and meaningful consultation with independent civil society in the selection process meant that the Secretary-General missed a key opportunity to build the legitimacy and authority of the next High Commissioner.’ The appointment of the Secretary-General’s confidant may have reaffirmed worries that the High Commissioner would prioritise diplomacy and engagement over advocacy for human rights. However, Türk appears to have the appropriate biography and a heart in the right place to fulfil both of the High Commissioner’s roles as an advocate and a diplomat. Hopefully he will be attentive to civil society and rights-holders, in line with his advice during his time as Assistant High Commissioner for Protection at UNHCR: ‘Listen to what refugees are telling us.’
After being appointed at the last minute as the next UN high commissioner for human rights, Volker Turk is not expected to be at the 51st session of the UN Human Rights Council, held from 12 September to 7 October. When he does, Turk will have to grapple among other challenges with his predecessor’s report on Xinjiang, but for the moment deputy high commissioner Nada Al Nashif is in charge of the UN rights office and will have to answer any questions about China that might come up during the first days of debate..
https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/09/08/un-new-rights-chief-should-speak-out-all-victims
Finally the long awaited UN report on China
September 1, 2022A long-delayed but groundbreaking United Nations report published on August 31, 2022, says the Chinese government has committed abuses that may amount to crimes against humanity targeting Uyghurs and other Turkic communities in the Xinjiang region. The report by the outgoing UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Michelle Bachelet, contains victim accounts that substantiate mass arbitrary detention, torture, cultural persecution, forced labor, and other serious human rights violations, and recommends that states, businesses, and the international community take action with a view to ending the abuses, and advancing justice and accountability. See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2022/06/09/disappointment-with-un-high-commissioners-visit-to-xinjiang-boils-over/
“The UN human rights chief for the first time lays bare the Chinese government’s grave abuses and concludes they may amount to crimes against humanity,” said John Fisher, Global Advocacy Deputy Director at Human Rights Watch. “Victims and their families whom the Chinese government has long vilified have at long last seen their persecution recognized, and can now look to the UN and its member states for action to hold those responsible accountable.”
The high commissioner’s report challenges the Chinese government’s blatant disregard for its international human rights obligations, Human Rights Watch said. It calls on businesses to meet their responsibilities to respect human rights, and for follow-up by UN member countries and bodies, which could take the form of an investigation to interview victims and survivors, identify those responsible, gather evidence, and recommend strategies for accountability. Similar recent UN Human Rights Council mechanisms have included commissions of inquiry, fact-finding missions, and independent international monitoring missions. This could also lead to the identification of all those missing and forcibly disappeared so that they can be reunited with their families.
The report should be formally presented to the Human Rights Council as a matter of priority, Human Rights Watch said, so that states can discuss the report’s findings and take the steps needed to implement its recommendations.
In the report, the high commissioner details widespread abuses, including targeting of cultural and religious practices, family separation, arbitrary arrests and detention, rape, torture, and enforced disappearances, across Xinjiang. The report concludes that “[t]he extent of arbitrary and discriminatory detention of members of Uyghur and other predominantly Muslim groups, pursuant to law and policy, in context of restrictions and deprivation more generally of fundamental rights enjoyed individually and collectively, may constitute international crimes, in particular crimes against humanity.”
Detainees interviewed for the report described conditions in so-called “vocational training centres” that would amount to torture or other forms of ill-treatment, including “being beaten with batons, including electric batons while strapped in a so-called “tiger chair”; being subjected to interrogation with water being poured in their faces; prolonged solitary confinement; and being forced to sit motionless on small stools for prolonged periods of time.”
The report noted that Chinese authorities continue to openly criticize victims and their relatives now living abroad for speaking about their experiences in Xinjiang, engaging in acts of intimidation, threats, and reprisals. In the words of one interviewee: “We had to sign a document to remain silent about the camp. Otherwise, we would be kept for longer and there would be punishment for the whole family.”
The report also draws on analyses of Chinese laws, regulations, and policies. The findings are consistent with those of academics, journalists, and human rights organizations, published since 2017 documenting grave international crimes. In the past five years, Human Rights Watch has documented mass arbitrary detention, pervasive surveillance, and crimes against humanity across the region.
The high commissioner has been systematically assessing a growing body of evidence regarding Chinese government human rights violations targeting Uyghurs and other Turkic communities. Treaty body reviews and reports from UN human rights experts also informed the new report, reinforcing concerns about secret detention and unlawful family separations, among other violations.
In June 2020, 50 UN human rights experts urged the Human Rights Council to establish an independent UN mandate to monitor and report on human rights violations in China, partly in response to Chinese government resistance to UN human rights scrutiny. In June 2022, another group of UN experts reiterated the 2020 statement and again urged Chinese authorities to grant them access to investigate “allegations of significant human rights violations and repression of fundamental freedoms in the country.”
In May, Bachelet visited China, despite being unable to travel or engage with interlocutors freely, and had little direct engagement with affected communities. In an end-of-mission statement delivered on May 28, Bachelet underlined that the visit was not an investigation, which she noted would require “detailed, methodical, discreet work of an investigative nature.” The new report lays a solid foundation for further UN and Human Rights Council action towards accountability in China.
“Never has it been so important for the UN system to stand up to Beijing, and to stand with victims,” Fisher said. “Governments should waste no time establishing an independent investigation and taking all measures necessary to advance accountability and provide Uyghurs and others the justice they are entitled.”
Amnesty International’s Secretary General Agnès Callamard said:
“This 46-page document lays bare the scale and severity of the human rights violations taking place in Xinjiang – which Amnesty International previously concluded amounted to crimes against humanity. There can be little doubt why the Chinese government fought so hard to pressure the UN to conceal it.
https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/08/31/china-new-un-report-alleges-crimes-against-humanity
Karen activist Porlajee ‘Billy’ Rakchongcharoen’s murder: finally an indictment
August 22, 2022The Thai authorities should fully and fairly prosecute all those responsible for the murder of a prominent ethnic Karen environmental activist, Porlajee ‘Billy’ Rakchongcharoen, in 2014, Human Rights Watch said on 16 August 2022. See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2014/05/06/un-high-commissioner-condemns-disappearance-of-billy-in-context-of-retaliation-against-environmentalist-in-south-east-asia/
On August 15, 2022, the Attorney General’s Office formally notified the Justice Ministry’s Department of Special Investigation (DSI) of its decision to indict four park officials accused of abducting and murdering Porlajee “Billy” Rakchongcharoen in April 2014. The charges include illegal confinement, premeditated murder, and concealing the victim’s body.
“Thai officials have long hindered justice for Billy through cover-ups and exploitation of legal loopholes,” said Elaine Pearson, acting Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “The authorities can right this wrong by ensuring that the attorney general’s decision to indict four officials moves promptly to an effective and fair prosecution.”
Billy was last seen on April 17, 2014, in the custody of Chaiwat Limlikitaksorn, then-head of Kaeng Krachan National Park in Phetchaburi province, and his staff. The park officials said they released him after questioning him briefly and had no information regarding his whereabouts. On September 3, 2019, DSI officials announced that his remains had been found in Kaeng Krachan National Park. Chaiwit was among the four indicted.
Pinnapa Prueksapan, Billy’s wife, told Human Rights Watch that she hoped there would be answers to basic questions, such as who had abducted and killed her husband, and who had obstructed justice.
Thailand is obligated under international human rights treaties to which it is a party to investigate and appropriately prosecute enforced disappearance, torture, custodial deaths, and other alleged human rights violations. In addition, in September 2019, Prime Minister Gen. Prayut Chan-ocha ordered the Department of Special Investigation to ensure that the case was watertight so the culprits could be brought to justice, regardless of their rank or position.
However, the investigation has suffered from a cover-up, Human Rights Watch said. Despite a long list of allegations against Chaiwat for serious abuses and misconduct during his tenure as head of Kaeng Krachan National Park, he has never been held to account.
In addition, Thai law does yet not recognize enforced disappearances as a crime. Human Rights Watch has repeatedly urged Prime Minister Prayut and his government to ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, which Thailand signed in 2012, and make enforced disappearance a criminal offense.
Chaiwat and his staff arrested Billy on April 17, 2014, for alleged illegal possession of a wild bee honeycomb and six bottles of honey.
At the time of his enforced disappearance, he was traveling to meet with ethnic Karen villagers and activists in preparation for an upcoming court hearing in the villagers’ lawsuit against Chaiwat and the National Park, Wildlife, and Plant Conservation Department of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment.
The villagers alleged in the lawsuit that, in July 2011, park authorities had burned and destroyed the houses and property of more than 20 Karen families in the Bangkloy Bon village. Billy was also preparing to submit a petition about this case to Thailand’s monarch. When he was arrested, he was carrying case files and related documents with him. Those files have never been recovered.
In September 2014, Police Region 7 officers filed malfeasance charges under article 157 of the penal code against Chaiwat and three other park officials for unlawfully detaining him. The other suspects named in the case are Boontaen Bussarakham, Thanaseth or Pitoon Chaemthes, and Krissanapong Jitthes. The DSI found traces of human blood in a vehicle belonging to the park office, but was not able to verify if the blood belonged to Billy because the vehicle was cleaned before forensic experts could examine it.
On September 3, 2019, the DSI announced that his remains had been found in Kaeng Krachan National Park, where he was last seen in custody of the park officials. The investigation team found an oil barrel, its lid, two steel rods, a burned wooden piece, and two bones at the bottom of the reservoir on April 26, 2019.
The Central Institute of Forensic Science subsequently confirmed the genetic trace of one of the bones found inside the barrel matched Billy’s mother. The investigation team then concluded it was part of his remains. The condition of this piece of human skull, which was burned, cracked, and shrunk due to exposure to heat of 200 to 300 degrees Celsius, suggests the killers burned his body to conceal the crime.
“The indictment of Chaiwat and other park officials is an important step for justice for Billy and all those whom Thai government officials have forcibly disappeared and killed,” Pearson said. “Thai authorities should recognize that they can’t escape being held accountable for the most heinous crimes.”
https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/08/16/thailand-officials-indicted-karen-activists-murder
Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards 