On Tuesday, 5th March, 2pm – at the Palais des Nations, Room XXV- will take place the side event Resisting in Exile: Voice of Human Rights Defenders
“I do not like the idea of being a refugee. I do not want to leave the country because I wanted to make it better.” Human rights defender quoted by the Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders in A/HRC/37/51.
In ‘People Power Under Attack’ (2022), CIVICUS reports that the number of countries where civic freedoms are being curtailed and civil society is under severe attack is increasing… In such contexts and under such pressure, defenders can see leaving the country as their only option. These defenders, along with defenders expelled by their home governments, face the huge challenges of short or protracted exile, including economic insecurity and ongoing threats. Defenders in exile question if and how they can continue human rights work from abroad and how those who remain deal with a fractured human rights community.
In this event the four organisers [Centre for Civil and Political Rights (CCPR-Centre), International Institute on Race, Equality and Human Rights, (Race and Equality), International Service for Human Rights (ISHR), and DefendDefenders] will bring the voices of human rights defenders from around the world to the Council so that States, UN experts and officials and civil society colleagues can hear their voices. What is the experience of being in exile like? What is the impact on individual work and that of the community of defenders? What demands do exile defenders make to the Council?
This event aims to raise greater awareness about the phenomenon of defenders in exile and encourage discussion and action on how to support these defenders. It is also aimed at looking at what is needed to prevent exile becoming some defenders’ only feasible option.
During this event, defenders in exile from will speak of the impact of their experience of exile on their own lives, those of their families, and their communities. They will highlight the specific needs defenders in exile have in terms of legal guarantees, and political and financial support and of their ongoing work to defend rights from exile.
Defenders in exile will also send in testimonies, to be shown in video form or read out by fellow defenders. We aim to fill the room with the voices of those in exile who cannot be in Geneva to participate directly.
Recall the recommendations made by the previous Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders, Michel Forst, in his 2018 report to the Council (A/HRC/37/51), including in regard to the prohibition of non-refoulement to persecution, relocation schemes, and access to protection measures for defenders in exile.
The conversation will take place during the Council session when the Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders will be presenting her report to the Council. We hope that the Special Rapporteur will be available to, highlight the need for greater attention to, and investment in the prevention of, the closure of civic space so as to forestall the need for defenders to leave the country.
In a landmark paper, the UN Special Rapporteur on Environmental Defenders under the Aarhus Convention warns that the continued State efforts to repress and criminalise environmental protests, including direct action and civil disobedience, are a threat to fundamental freedoms and democracy itself.
The world is currently facing a triple planetary crisis and despite this alarming and unprecedented situation, States are failing to meaningfully address it. In response to this, environmental human right defenders (EHRDs), Indigenous Peoples, peasants movements and civil society from around the world have exercised their right to peacefully protest and participate in demonstrations to pressure their governments into taking concrete actions.
Some of these demonstrations have taken the form of civil disobedience which has been disproportionately repressed by governments and law enforcement officials.
On 28 February 2024 Michel Forst, the UN Special Rapporteur on Environmental Defenders, published a position paper highlighting a trend towards the repression and criminalisation of defenders engaging in environmental protests and civil disobedience in Europe, as well as an alarming toughening of stances against them in political discourse and the law enforcement and judicial practices. [The UNECE Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters – known as the Aarhus Convention – was adopted in 1998. It aims to protect every person’s right to live in an environment adequate to his or her health and well-being.] See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/tag/aarhus-convention/]
Forst also points to legislative attempts to ban specific organisations – citing France’s Soulèvements de la Terre, Spain’s Futuro Vegetal, or Letze Generation in Germany and Austria. These moves come alongside new or updated laws – including the UK’s ‘2022 Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act’ and Italy’s 2024 ‘eco vandalism’ law -, which the paper says have virtually prohibited certain kinds of protests.
The Special Rapporteur flags how politicians demonise environmental movements engaging in civil disobedience, while national or pan-European intelligence services no longer hesitate to label peaceful groups or individuals as potential or genuine terrorist threats.
The paper also recognises that European States have been disproportionately and increasingly used criminal, administrative and civil measures against environmental human rights defenders recurring to civil disobedience. This includes excessive and disproportionate use of force against them and extensive investigation and surveillance measures.
Other takeaways include the use of social media by State and non-state actors that have contributed to creating negative narratives against EHRDs and the challenges that defenders and activists face to access to justice.
While civil disobedience tactics have been recently used in protests related to climate justice, they have been constantly used to advocate for other legitimate causes including international solidarity, where States have also criminalised such moves.
This paper also comes shortly after the 25th anniversary of the UN Declaration of Human Right Defenders and it is a good reminder that civil disobedience is and should be recognised as a legitimate form of exercising the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly.
States must stop criminalising human right defenders exercising these rights and focus on addressing the root causes of their mobilisation.
At the 55th session of the Human Rights Council, Volker Türk – UN High Commissioner for Human Rights – made his overview statement on 4 march 2024. Here some highlights:
….Around the world, 55 conflicts are flaring. Widespread violations of international humanitarian and human rights law are generating devastating impact on millions of civilians. Displacement and humanitarian crises have already reached an unprecedented scale. And all of these conflicts have regional and global impact.
Overlapping emergencies make the spectre of spillover conflict very real. The war in Gaza has explosive impact across the Middle East. Conflicts in other regions – including in the Horn of Africa, Sudan and the Sahel – could also escalate sharply. Increasing militarisation on the Korean Peninsula raises threat levels. The deteriorating security c risis in the eastern provinces of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which the Council will address on 3 April, is alarming. In the Red Sea, as well as the Black Sea, attacks are creating shock-waves for the global transport of goods, adding to the economic pain inflicted on less developed countries…..
In Latin America and the Caribbean, the prevalence and violence of gangs and organized crime have severe impact on the lives and rights of millions of people, including in Ecuador, Haiti, Honduras and Mexico. Punitive and militarized responses have in some cases led to grave human rights violations, potentially further fuelling violence. Only policies grounded in human rights can provide effective and sustainable solutions. Corruption, impunity, poor governance and the structural root causes of violence – such as discrimination and failure to uphold economic, social and cultural rights – must be tackled, with the full participation of civil society and affected communities. International cooperation needs to be enhanced, to address the illegal arms trade and ensure accountability for transnational crimes…
Fear is fragmenting societies across the world, unleashing fury and hatred. They are also fuelled by a winner-take-all attitude that frames elections as the spoils of conquest.
..Good governance requires constant oversight and accountability, via independent checks and balances to the exercise of power, meaning that it is strongly underpinned by the rule of law, including independent justice systems. Fundamental freedoms – the rights to freedom of opinion, expression, peaceful assembly and association – are also essential.
…
I am profoundly concerned by the prospect of intense disinformation campaigns in the context of elections, fuelled by generative artificial intelligence. There is an acute need for robust regulatory frameworks to ensure responsible use of generative AI, and my Office is doing its utmost to advance them…
Autocracy and military coups are the negation of democracy. Every election – even an imperfect one – constitutes an effort to at least formally acknowledge the universal aspiratio n to democracy However, in a so-called ‘illiberal democracy’ – or, as the Prime Minister of Hungary referred to his country, an ‘illiberal State’ – the formal structure of election is maintained, civic freedoms are restricted, the media’s scrutiny of governance is eroded by installing government control over key media outlets, and independent oversight and justice institutions are deeply undermined, concentrating power in the executive branch.
It is important to recognise that in many cases, this year’s electoral processes will ensure a smooth transfer of power, free of hatred; and that the governance structures that result will broadly achieve their main function of representing the many voices of the people, and advancing their rights.
But in other cases, I have serious concerns about the human rights context in which several elections are taking place.
In the Russian Federation, the authorities have further intensified their repression of dissenting voices prior to this month’s Presidential election. Several candidates have been prevented from running, due to alleged administrative irregularities. The death in prison of opposition leader Alexei Navalny adds to my serious concerns about his persecution. Since the onset of Russia’s war on Ukraine, t housands of politicians, journalists, human rights defenders, lawyers and people who have simply spoken their minds on social media have faced administrative and criminal charges, and this trend appears to have worsened in recent months, with many cultural figures targeted. Last month, a new bill passed into law that further punishes people convicted of distributing information deemed to be false about Russia’s armed forces, as well as people who seek to implement decisions by international organizations that the Russian Federation “does not take part in”. I urge a swift and comprehensive review of all cases of deprivation of liberty that result from the exercise of fundamental freedoms; as well as an immediate end to the repression of independent voices and the legal professionals who represent them. The future of the country depends on an open space.
Iran’s legislative election three days ago was Iranians’ first opportunity to vote since the “Women, Life, Freedom” protests of 2022 and 2023. It took place in a country that has been deeply divided by the Government’s repression of the rights of women and girls. People who participated in the protests have been persecuted, imprisoned on long sentences and in some cases, put to death. The draft Bill on “Supporting the Family by Promoting the Culture of Chastity and Hijab”, if adopted, would impose severe punishments for acts that should not be deemed criminal in any country. In my ongoing engagement with the Iranian authorities, I have urged immediate reforms to uphold the rights of all Iranians, including the right of women to make their own choices, and an immediate moratorium on the death penalty….
In the United States of America, in this electoral year, it is particularly important for authorities at all levels to implement recent recommendations by the UN Human Rights Committee to ensure that suffrage is non-discriminatory, equal and universal. A 2021 Presidential executive order acknowledges that disproportionate and discriminatory policies and other obstacles have restricted the right to vote for people of African descent, and emphasises the need to overturn them. Yet according to the Brennan Center for Justice , at least 14 states have passed laws in 2023 that have the effect of making voting more difficult. In a context of intense political polarisation, it is important to emphasise equal rights, and the equal value of every citizen’s vote…
In Afghanistan, I deplore continuing and systematic violations of human rights, particularly the comprehensive violations of the rights of women and girls, which exclude them from every aspect of public life, including secondary and tertiary education; employment; and movement. Advancing the rights of women and girls must be the highest priority for all who work on and in Afghanistan. The civic freedoms and media freedoms of all Afghans are profoundly curtailed, with many women human rights defenders and journalists suffering arbitrary detentions. The resumption of public executions is horrific. I remain concerned about forced expulsion of Afghans from neighbouring countries, particularly for those who face a risk of persecution, torture or other irreparable harm in Afghanistan.
In the United Arab Emirates, another mass trial is underway based on counter-terrorism legislation that contravenes human rights law. In December, new charges were brought against 84 people, including human rights defenders, journalists and others who were already in prison. Several were nearing the end of their sentence or have been arbitrarily held in detention after completion of their sentence. Their joint prosecution constitutes the second-largest mass trial in the UAE’s history, after the so-called “UAE94” case in 2021, and includes many of the same defendants. I remain concerned about broader patterns of suppression of dissent and the civic space in the country, and I urge the Government to review domestic laws in line with international human rights recommendations.
Dialogue between China and my Office continues in areas such as counterterrorism policies, gender equality, minority protection, civic space, and economic, social and cultural rights. As we move forward, it is important that this dialogue yield concrete results, notably in respect of the policy areas raised during the Universal Periodic Review. I recognise China’s advances in alleviating poverty and advancing development, and I have urged that these advances be accompanied by reforms to align relevant laws and policies with international human rights standards. During the UPR, China announced plans to adopt 30 new measures for human rights protection, including amendments to the Criminal Law, and revisions of the Criminal Procedure Law. My Office looks forward to engaging with China on this; I particularly encourage revision of the vague offence of “picking quarrels and making trouble” in Article 293 of the Criminal Law, and I urge the release of human rights defenders, lawyers and others detained under such legislation. I also call on the Government to implement the recommendations made by my Office and other human rights bodies in relation to laws, policies and practises that violate fundamental rights, including in the Xinjiang and Tibet regions. I am engaging with the Hong Kong authorities on continuing concerns about national security laws…
In many countries, including in Europe and North America, I am concerned by the apparently growing influence of so-called “great replacement” conspiracy theories, based on the false notion that Jews, Muslims, non-white people and migrants seek to “replace” or suppress countries’ cultures and peoples. These delusional and deeply racist ideas have directly influenced many perpetrators of violence. Together with the so called “war on woke,” which is really a war on inclusion, these ideas aim to exclude racial minorities – particularly women from racial minorities – and LGBTQ+ people from full equality. Multiculturalism is not a threat: it is the history of humanity, and deeply beneficial to us all.
Peace, like development, is built and nourished through rights. It is by upholding and advancing the full spectrum of human rights, including the right to development and the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment, that States can craft solutions that are durable – because they respond to the universal truth of our equality and the inextinguishable desire for freedom and justice.
History is a record of humanity’s capacity to surmount the worst challenges. Among the greatest achievements of humanity over the past 75 years has been the recognition that addressing human rights in every country– all human rights; it is not an à la carte menu – is a matter of international concern.
Thematic areas of interest… Acts of intimidation and reprisals ISHR remains deeply concerned about reprisals against civil society actors who engage or seek to engage with UN bodies and mechanisms. We call for all States and the Council to do more to address the situation. HRC55 is a key opportunity for States to raise concerns about specific cases of reprisals and demand that governments provide an update on any investigation or action taken toward accountability. An increasing number of States have raised concerns in recent sessions about individual cases of reprisals, including at HRC39, HRC41, HRC42, HRC43, HRC45, HRC51, HRC52, and HRC53, and HRC54. States raising cases is an important aspect of seeking accountability and ending impunity for acts of reprisal and intimidation against defenders engaging with the UN. It can also send a powerful message of solidarity to defenders, supporting and sustaining their work in repressive environments. We urge States to continue to raise the cases ISHR has campaigned on in the last two years in their statements. We also urge States to raise and follow up on individual cases of reprisals in the country specific debates taking place at this session. Further information on these cases can be found here or by contacting the ISHR team at s.hosseiny@ishr.ch
Other thematic debates
At this 55th session, the Council will discuss a range of economic, social and cultural rights through dedicated debates with Special Rapporteurs.
Country-specific developments
Attacks against fundamental freedoms in relation to Palestine in Western Europe and North America (including Austria, France, Germany, Italy, United States, United Kingdom): Civil society and international experts have raised grave concern at the attacks on fundamental freedoms when advocating for the rights of Palestinians by authorities in Western Countries. The attacks on freedoms of expression, assembly and association being monitored since October 2023 are by no means a new trend. For example, in September 2023, Amnesty International issued a statement addressing ‘restrictions of freedom of expression and freedom of assembly through blanket, pre-emptive bans imposed on assemblies on the occasion of Nakba Remembrance Day in Berlin’ by the Berlin Assembly Authority. However there has been a notable escalation in the intensity of these attacks as well as the political and legal measures put forward to further curtail fundamental freedoms in relation to Palestine since October 2023. Western governments, who regularly call for strong protection of human rights and civic space, are emboldening Israel’s indiscriminate attacks by cracking down on free expression and peaceful assembly, online and offline. Authorities have resorted to banning the holding of demonstrations, cracked down on demonstrators, and arrested protesters. Moreover, individuals have been fired from their jobs for voicing opinions on social media. Individuals have also reported facing hate speech, censorship and self-censoring fearing reprisals, including discrimination and criminalisation for voicing their opinions online and offline. Special Procedures have concluded that the undue restrictions imposed by States, especially Western States, ‘on peaceful protests and civil society working to protect human rights and humanitarian law in the context of the Gaza war are contrary to States’ obligation under international law to prevent atrocity crimes, such as genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and apartheid’. They stressed ‘that inclusive and meaningful collaboration with civil society, human rights defenders, […] and protest movements is vital to end the cycle of violence and impunity […], dismantling apartheid and ensuring justice and accountability […]’. Special Procedures have also addressed how ‘risks of potential anti-Semitism have also been used as a justification by some States to ban and criminalise peaceful assemblies and expressions in support of Palestinians’ rights’. Civil society has for years deplored the misuse by Israel and Western States of this argument to suppress Palestinian rights advocacy through the IHRA working definition of antisemitism. The Arab Center Washington DC stressed that ‘conflation between antisemitism and legitimate criticism of Israeli crimes against Palestinian civilians (heightened by the adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism by many States and organisations), leads to the silencing of Palestinian voices’. The normalisation of anti-Palestinian racism, rarely treated as equal human beings by the media or politicians, has also led to the dehumanisation of Palestinians as emphasised by the Special Procedures who stressed that ‘States have sought to justify these restrictions by referring to risks related to incitement to hatred and ‘glorification’ or ‘support of terrorism’, and potential risks to national security or public order. This approach is not only arbitrary, but it also dehumanises Palestinians by unjustly linking them as a whole to criminal endeavours and terrorism.’ Moreover, Special Procedures have stressed that ’employees in the public and private sectors should also not face reprisals, such as disciplinary measures or loss of employment, for speaking out’. They emphasised the importance for States and relevant academic institutions to respect academic freedoms, and ensure that students and teaching staff can freely associate, assemble and express their views with regards to the war in Gaza and the Israeli occupation of Palestine. The European Legal Support Center (ELSC) has monitored 661 incidents of repression against the Palestinian solidarity movement or individuals advocating for Palestinian rights since 7 October : 219 took place in Germany, 172 in the UK, 72 in France, 45 in Italy, 16 in Austria and 137 in other European countries. These include legal action or threats of legal action; restriction of movement, harassment, intimidation or violence; smear campaigns; threats to citizenship of residency status; disciplinary investigation, loss of employment or suspension from position; threats to academic freedom; refusal or withdrawal of use of venue or cancelation of events; defunding or financial de-risking. Since 2014, Palestine Legal has responded to over 2200 incidents in the US of suppression of Palestinian rights advocacy aimed at intimidating Palestinians and their supporters into silence and inaction. Since October 7, Palestine Legal responded to over 1258 reports of suppression of Palestinian rights advocacy in the US. Palestine Legal and over 600 legal organisations and professionals based in the USA urged in a joint letter elected officials and institutional leaders ‘to take urgent measures to address the surging racist attacks and unlawful retaliation against advocates for Palestinian right They address ‘an unprecedented barrage of extreme attacks that Palestinians and their allies in the U.S. are facing, including violent assaults, hate speech, employment discrimination, severe harassment and doxxing of students, law enforcement visits, and censorship in different arenas of civic and social life’. The organisation stressed that ‘hundreds of incidents happening across the country signal a much broader effort to criminalise dissent, justify censorship, and incite anti-Palestinian, anti-Arab, and anti-Muslim harassment, doxing and vigilantism against Palestinians and their allies. This is not a new phenomenon, but it is escalating at terrifying speed.’ In line with Special Procedures recommendations, we urge States, in particular Western States to: immediately and unconditionally release all arbitrarily detained individuals ‘for the exercise of their rights to freedom of peaceful assembly, of association and of freedom of expression in the context in Israel/occupied Palestinian territory’. Put an end to the intimidation and criminalisation of ‘civil society and activists advocating for respect of Palestinians’ rights, including the right to self-determination, for boycotts, divestment and sanctions, international criminal accountability, and an end to the alleged crimes of apartheid and genocide against Palestinians’ Ensure that ‘legislation and policy measures designed to counter anti-Semitism or terrorism are not used to suppress fundamental freedoms or to restrict civil society’s access to resources and/or criminalize them for their legitimate work.’ Ensure that ‘civil society organizations, human rights defenders and academics, working on Palestinian rights can exercise the ability to seek, receive and use financial resources, including foreign funding; and that counter-terrorism laws, including financing laws, are not applied in a manner contrary to international standards.’
Algeria
The sustained repression against the pro-democracy movement and human rights defenders in Algeria was addressed in the end of session statements of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of association and assembly as well as the Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders who conducted official visits to Algeria in 2023. These were the first visits since 2016 by UN mandate holders to the country. The Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Assembly and Association addressed the ‘criminalisation of civil society work’, and the ‘suspension or dissolution of political parties and associations, including prominent human rights advocacy organisations’ (including RAJ and LADDH), as well as ‘overly restrictive laws and regulations’ hindering their work. The rapporteurs called for the amendment of laws used to curtail fundamental freedoms, including article 87 bis of the Penal Code, used to outlaw movements such as the Movement for the Autonomy of Kabylie (MAK) and the Islamic political movement Rachad, both declared terrorist entities, and to bring criminal charges against individuals for exercising their rights to expression and assembly. Following her visit and attending the trial of three Algerian human rights defenders who faced terrorism charges, UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders ‘welcomed the acquittal of Jamila Loukil, Kaddour Chouicha and Said Boudour’. While this is a positive development, a big number of activists and HRDs remain arbitrarily detained in Algeria. The SR on HRDs addressed the arbitrary detention of Kamira Nait Sid, a WHRD and co-president of the World Amazigh Congress sentenced to three years in prison where she visited her. She was arrested and tried on charges of ‘undermining national unity” and “belonging to a terrorist organisation’. The Special Rapporteur also met with HRD Ahmed Manseri, was put in pre-trial detention following meeting the Special Rapporteur on FoAA, ‘a picture of him meeting the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Association and Assembly was included in his case file’. In line with the decision of the WGAD, Algeria should release arbitrarily detained HRD Mohamed BabaNadjar, detained since 2005 and serving a life sentence for his work on the rights of the Amazigh people. ISHR is alarmed at the level of self-censorship and risk of reprisals individuals face for engaging with the UN and its mechanisms. The SR on HRDs reported that individuals were self-censoring ‘for fear of being charged under Article 87 bis’. The SR on FoAA reported that activists told him that they were not willing to meet him ‘in person as they feared they could be subject to reprisals by authorities for undermining national security.’ The SR on HRDs also reported that some HRDs she intended to meet “refused or cancelled at the last minute, for fear of reprisals”. We urge all States to demand that Algeria, an HRC member, end its crackdown on human rights defenders and civil society organisations as well as put an end to all acts of intimidation and reprisals. We also call on States to call for the immediate release of all individuals arbitrarily detained, including woman human rights defender Kamira Nait Sid, and Mohamed BabaNadjar, and to urge Algeria to amend all legislation that hinders the work of civil society, including article 87 bis, regulations on funding, and other undue limitations to freedom of assembly and association.
Bahrain
Bahrain continues to imprison human rights defenders, including Abduljalil Al-Singace, Abdulhadi Al-Khawaja and Naji Fateel, despite their prolonged incarceration deemed arbitrary by the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention. High profile opposition figures such as Sheikh Ali Salman, Hassan Mushaima, and Abdulwahab Hussain also remain behind bars.
On 19 September 2023, the UN Secretary-General published their annual report naming five individuals who faced reprisals for cooperating with United Nations mechanisms. The death penalty continues to be used, with 26 individuals on death row, many alleging torture and coerced confessions. Death row inmates Mohamed Ramadhan and Husain Moosa have been detained for a decade and are at risk of imminent execution despite UNWGAD calling for their immediate and unconditional release and impending execution. Last year, over 800 political prisoners in Jau Prison launched a hunger strike to protest harsh conditions, discrimination and ill-treatment.
We call on States to urge Bahraini authorities to unconditionally release all those sentenced for their political opinions, including human rights defenders, stop reprisals for cooperating with the UN, and implement recommendations by UN Special Procedures.
China
China’s fourth UPR review on January 23 exposed strong international condemnation over grave abuses, and calls for unfettered access to the whole country for UN Special Procedures experts, including from the Global South. Numerous recommendations and advanced questions referred to the overwhelming evidence of grave abuses documented by UN bodies since 2018, compiled in a repository published by ISHR. This vast array of UN recommendations constitute an impartial benchmark to assess the Chinese government’s willingness and actions to address systematic and widespread human rights violations. Follow-up to these welcome steps must be ensured. To uphold the integrity of its mandate and put an end to China’s exceptionalism, the HRC must establish a monitoring and reporting mechanism on the country, as repeatedly called for by over 40 UN experts and hundreds of human rights groups globally. States should further urge the UN High Commissioner to strengthen follow-up action on his Office’s Xinjiang report, including through public calls for implementation, translation of the report, and an assessment of its implementation. States should ensure sustained visibility at the HRC of China’s abuse of national security and other cross-cutting abuses affecting Uyghurs, Tibetans, Hong Kongers and mainland Chinese defenders, including the latest crackdown on human rights lawyers. Finally, States should ask for the prompt release of human rights defenders, including feminist activists Huang Xueqin and Li Qiaochu, human rights lawyers Chang Weiping, Ding Jiaxi, Yu Wensheng and his wife Xu Yan, legal scholar Xu Zhiyong, Uyghur doctor Gulshan Abbas, Hong Kong lawyer Chow Hang-tung, and Tibetan climate activist A-nya Sengdra.
Democratic Republic of the Congo
The government must engage civil society in the drafting of the implementation, ensure it is in line with international standards and doesn’t further restrict the rights of defenders in the country. The United Nations Joint Human Rights Office (UNJHRO) must support the calls of civil society and ensure the protection and promotion of defenders is part of its support to the government of the DRC.
The Council will consider oral updates with the High Commissioner and the team of international experts on the DRC on 3 April, followed by General Debate.
According to human rights organisations, at least 251 defendants were rotated to new cases in 2023, and another 620 defendants in 2022, demonstrating the continued involvement of the judicial authorities in violations of the right to fair trial and undermining the rule of law.
The Human Rights Committee also called on Egypt to ‘ensure that court proceedings in terrorism cases are fully in line with articles 14 and 15 of the Covenant to ensure fair trials and put an end to the use of mass trials that are inherently not aligned with international standards’. UN Special Procedures have raised their concerns with Egypt on the ‘Terrorism Circuit Courts and allegations of their incompatibility with international due process guarantees, as well as alleged violations of fundamental rights of many individuals, including human rights defenders, who have been tried, or are still waiting to be tried, before these courts’. According to the Egyptian Front for Human Rights’ annual report, the Terrorism Circuit Courts ordered the release of only 3 defendants, approximately 0.1% of the 35966 cases of detention renewals under its consideration in 2023. The Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights (EIPR) has also documented this pattern of what is commonly referred to as ‘hearings of detention renewals’ by the Terrorism Circuit Courts, including most recently renewals of detention of almost 900 defendants on 21 and 22 January 2024. Since the Committee against Torture (CAT) reached ‘the inescapable conclusion‘ in 2017 that ‘torture is a systematic practice in Egypt,’ the Egyptian government has not taken any serious steps to address the issue. In a new report submitted to the CAT, REDRESS and a coalition of Egyptian and international civil society organisations – including the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights, the Egyptian Commission for Rights and Freedoms, Dignity, and the International Commission of Jurists – conclude that the widespread and systematic use of torture by the Egyptian authorities amounts to a crime against humanity under customary international law. ISHR reiterates the calls of more than 100 NGOs from around the world in urging the HRC to create a monitoring and reporting mechanism on the ever-deteriorating human rights situation in Egypt.
Guatemala
Guatemala is living historic and hugely challenging times. The undermining of Guatemala’s State institutions over many years has led to a collapse in the rule of law and a worsening human rights crisis. The judicial system has been largely stripped of its independence and attacks and threats against human rights defenders and justice operators have been rife. Currently at least 45 former justice operators have been forced into exile, with at least 10 facing criminal proceedings against them in the country. Guatemala’s new President, Bernardo Arévalo, has promised to re-establish the rule of law, fight against corruption and impunity and address poverty. At this session under General Debate 2, the Council will consider the High Commissioner’s report on OHCHR activities including in Guatemala. This is the opportunity for States to speak of their support for effective measures to address corruption, impunity and for the respect of human rights under the new Presidency, and to continue their commitment to monitoring government actions. States should call on Guatemala to use UPR and treaty body recommendations as a road map for the necessary reforms to reintroduce the rule of law, fight impunity and uphold human rights. States should call on Guatemala to commit to and accept visits of Special Procedures as a means to institute a regime of rights monitoring and recommendations. They should welcome the good news of the three year renewal of the mandate of the Office of the High Commissioner in Guatemala and suggest that the High Commissioner for Human Rights visit the country at his earliest convenience. States should urge the government to guarantee the security of indigenous communities and leaders and institute an ongoing dialogue with indigenous communities to hear and respond to their demands. In that regard, Guatemala should sign and ratify the Escazú Protocol as a matter of urgency. States should call on Guatemala to put the protection of defenders at the heart of the new government’s actions, including through the implementation of the public human rights defenders public protection policy, ordered by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in 2014.
Israel/OPT
The Council will hold an interactive dialogue with the High Commissioner on ensuring accountability and justice in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem on 29 February and an interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the oPt on 26 March. ISHR welcomes South Africa’s proceedings at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the situation in Gaza as an important step towards effective measures and accountability for atrocity crimes committed by Israel in the context of its decades long colonial apartheid imposed over the Palestinian people, including its latest war on Gaza. It also upheld international law in the face of decades of double standards during which the international community failed to take effective measures to ensure Israel complies with international law and the numerous UN resolutions and recommendations by UN special procedures, treaty bodies, and investigative mechanisms. Civil society organisations stressed that by ‘drawing on the nature of Israel’s military action, and ‘dehumanising’ statements by Israeli government officials, the Court found that Israel’s actions in Gaza are plausibly genocidal’, pending its final decision. These provisional measures which have a legally binding effect, ‘cannot be carried out without a full cessation of hostilities’, thus can only be effective with a ceasefire. In a joint statement from January 2024, Special Procedures deplored that they had raised the alarm of the risk of genocide several times and for months, ‘reminding all governments they have a duty to prevent genocide’ and stressing that ‘not only is Israel killing and causing irreparable harm against Palestinian civilians with its indiscriminate bombardments, it is also knowingly and intentionally imposing a high rate of disease, prolonged malnutrition, dehydration, and starvation by destroying civilian infrastructure’. The UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination raised ‘serious concerns regarding the obligation of Israel and other State parties to prevent crimes against humanity and genocide.’ Responding to arguments of Israel and other States, the Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel reiterated that article 51 which ‘provides for the use of force by a State in self-defense of the Charter […] is not applicable’. Special procedures expressed their profoundly concern about ‘the support of certain governments for Israel’s strategy of warfare against the besieged population of Gaza, and the failure of the international system to mobilise to prevent genocide’. ISHR and over 180 organisations, deplored the continued transfer of arms to Israel by States, including the US, the UK, Germany, Canada, Italy, the Netherlands, and stress that the provision of military equipment and military support to Israel with knowledge that they are likely to be used in serious violations of international law, including international crimes, invites charges of complicity. ISHR also denounces the defunding civil society organisations and UNRWA by Western States, a strategy implemented by Israel and discursively imposed by some States to silence the work of human rights defenders and ensure the demise of the Palestinian refugee issue and with it the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination. We call for an immediate and unconditional release of all Palestinians deprived of liberty without due process, and all Israeli hostages; and the lifting of the 17 year-old illegal blockade and closure of the Gaza Strip, which constitutes collective punishment. In line with the ICJ provisional measures, and based on the obligations of States under international law, including the Genocide Convention, we urge States to take immediate and effective measures to: Impose a ceasefire and ensure that Israel provides immediate and unhindered delivery of aid to the Gaza Strip; Implement a two-way arms embargo on Israel; Ensure that internally displaced Palestinians return to their areas of previous residence and are provided with safe shelters in accordance with IHL provisions; Support the work of the CoI to investigate the root causes of the situation on both sides of the Green Line, including through providing sufficient resources for the mechanism, to ensure accountability and redress; and Restore funding of UNRWA and civil society organisations working to ensure the delivery of humanitarian aid in the context of starvation and genocide as well as document human rights violations, respectively.
Mali
In Mali the human rights situation continues to deteriorate, with the government increasingly cracking down on media and opposition voices, significantly narrowing civic space. During the presentation of his last report at the 52nd session of the Human Rights Council, the Independent Expert highlighted the threats, physical assaults and attacks on their property defenders faced because of their opinions.
Additionally, he recognised that the progress recently made towards the return to constitutional order may not lead to credible, free, fair and inclusive electoral processes unless appropriate measures are taken to address the shrinking civic space in the country. Since the adoption of the defenders’ law in 2018, Mali is yet to fully guarantee the protection of the rights of defenders through its implementation. In 2020, Mali finally adopted its implementation decree for the HRD law shortly followed by the decision adopted by the Malian government which establishes the characteristics, procedures for granting and withdrawing the professional card of human rights defenders. ISHR continues to ask the independent expert what support he planned to give to the Malian government to ensure the full implementation of the defenders law and its protection mechanism. The HRC must keep the scrutiny on Mali to ensure that defenders in the country are protected in line with the UN Declaration and not restricted by the limitation imposed by a card defining the status of defenders. The Council will hold an interactive dialogue with the independent expert on 28 March. Nicaragua
The human rights situation in Nicaragua comes back on the agenda against this session with two planned debates. On 29 February the Group of Human Rights Experts will present its report followed by an interactive dialogue. On the 4 March there will be an oral update of the HC on the situation of human rights in Nicaragua followed by a general debate. At the Council’s last interactive dialogue on Nicaragua, on 18 December 2023, the UN Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights said of Nicaragua: ‘Every day the country deviates further from human rights.’ The last months have shown how true this remains. Upcoming regional elections on the Caribbean Coast (4 March) have provided a context for government crackdowns on opponents. The main indigenous and Afro-descendant political party in the country, YATAMA, has had its legal status revoked and two of its leaders, National Assembly legislator and YATAMA party chair Brooklyn Rivera and YATAMA legal representative Nancy Elizabeth Henríquez were arrested. The whereabouts of Brooklyn Rivera remain unknown. These arrests have been followed by increased militarisation in the territories on the Caribbean coast. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) and its Special Rapporteurship for Freedom of Expression have expressed concern about these and other attacks against indigenous communities in the country. Many Nicaraguan human rights defenders remain in exile with no possibility of return. These include Rolando Álvarez, sentenced to 26 years in prison after strongly criticising government repression last year and expelled from the country in mid-January 2024 alongside 17 other clerics. Repression against defenders continues. States must call on Nicaragua to immediately release all arbitrarily detained people including Freddy Quezada, subject of precautionary measures by the IACHR; to provide immediate information about the whereabouts of all those disappeared, including poet Carlos Bojorge, detained and disappeared one month ago, and Brooklyn Rivera. States should express firm support of the work of the Group of Experts on Nicaragua and OHCHR and call on Nicaragua to take urgent steps to meet the recommendations made to it by the Group of Experts, as well as OHCHR and – in the words of Nicaraguan HRD Cristina Huerta made in December at the Council – to call on Nicaragua to ‘put an end to the State violence against women and civil society and retake the path to democracy’. ISHR is co-organising a side event ‘The situation for exiled Nicaraguan activists a year after being released and stripped of nationality’ on 5th March, 15.30-16.30pm Geneva time, Room XXVII Palais de Nations. Co-organisers include the Permanent Missions of Argentina, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Ecuador and Paraguay, as well as NGOs CCPR, Race and Equality and PBI.
Occupied Western Sahara In October 2023, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention requested the immediate release of 18 Gdeim Izik prisoners from Western Sahara, held for over 13 years in Moroccan jails. In the last six years, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has rendered at least 11 decisions highlighting a systematic pattern of violations of the right to due process and fair trial, arbitrary arrests, torture, as well as violations to the right to freedom of expression, discrimination based on language, ethnicity and religion, especially targeting Saharawi activists advocating for the right to self-determination of Western Sahara. Prior, UN CAT issued five decisions on the Gdeim Izik prisoners, including in the case of Human rights activists Enaâma Asfari. Western Sahara is a former Spanish colony that remains under Moroccan occupation (despite a 1992 UN governed agreement for a referendum on independence, which Morocco continues to fail to comply with). In 1990, the General Assembly had reaffirmed that Western Sahara was a question of decolonisation
which remained to be completed by the people of Western Sahara. We urge States to call on Morocco to implement the decisions of the CAT and the WGAD and unconditionally release the Gdeim Izik arbitrarily detained activists, and all arbitrarily detained journalists and human rights defenders, while putting an end to all forms of harassment and reprisals against prisoners and their family. We further urge States to call on Morocco to put an end to its crackdown on civil society, particularly Saharawi human rights defenders in the occupied territory, ensure they are able to conduct their human rights work, and provide access to occupied Western Sahara to human rights bodies, including OHCHR, special procedures, and human rights organisations. As a member of the Human Rights Council and its president, and in line with resolution 60/251, Morocco should ‘uphold the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights’ and ‘fully cooperate with the Council’. In his update to the Council in March 2023, High Commissioner Turk highlighted that his Office has not been granted access to Western Sahara for the last eight years. Local human rights organisations report that international organisations and observers are barred from entering the territory to carry out meaningful human rights documentation and that human rights defenders trying to document and ensure monitoring are being targeted by the State.
In a joint statement, Special Procedures decried ‘the systematic and relentless targeting of human rights defenders in retaliation for exercising their rights to freedom of association and expression to promote human rights in Western Sahara’. They urged Morocco to ‘stop targeting human rights defenders and journalists standing up for human rights issues related to Western Sahara, and allow them to work without reprisals’.
Saudi Arabia According to ALQST’s annual report, despite the Saudi authorities’ recent efforts to open up to tourism and host international events, a prevailing climate of closure prevails – independent monitors are denied access to the country, the prison system is shrouded in secrecy, and trials are held behind closed doors.
In this ominous atmosphere, and following the almost complete diplomatic rehabilitation of crown prince and de facto ruler Mohammed bin Salman, widespread violations persist, including but not limited to: further decades-long prison sentences, and even a death sentence, meted out for peaceful social media use; the prosecution of women for their choice of clothing and advocacy for women’s rights; prisoners of conscience held incommunicado beyond the expiration of their sentences; arbitrary travel bans imposed on detainees and their family members in a form of collective punishment; and the execution of 172 individuals carried out over 2023, with several young men at imminent risk of execution for alleged crimes committed as minors.
In light of these alarming developments, ALQST and ISHR call on the Council to adopt a resolution mandating an independent international monitoring and investigative mechanism to address the human rights violations perpetrated in and by Saudi Arabia.
Sudan The humanitarian crisis in Sudan is dire, with millions displaced, widespread attacks on civilians including systematic SGBV as a weapon of war, amidst lack of global attention and adequate funding to respond to the crisis. Sudan faced a total communication blackout on 7 February 2024, following earlier disruptions at the end of January. These shutdowns severely endanger women human rights defenders and their work, hindering their ability to document atrocities and access essential resources such as mobile banking apps. Since the attack on Wad Madani in December 2023, WHRDs have lost resources, faced displacement, and enormous challenges searching for safe locations across states and neighboring countries. Dozens of women defenders were harassed, detained, summoned and threatened by both warring parties during the last few weeks. In recent months, the Sudanese Military Forces have intensified attacks on human rights defenders, journalists, and humanitarian workers in their controlled areas. Rapid Support Forces (RSF) have arrested civilians, engaged in looting, and perpetrated sexual violence systematically. WHRDs struggle to operate in these areas as the risks of sexual violence are expanding, with at least 5 WHRDs and first responders detained, summoned, or harassed recently. The attacks, which have resulted in the deaths of 4 WHRDs including 2 journalists and 11 women health workers, have occurred in territories controlled by both warring factions. Threats against medical services by both the RSF and the Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) continue to be reported including killings and kidnappings of health workers, attacks on hospitals and theft of medical supplies; exacerbating the humanitarian crisis for millions internally displaced without access to necessities and healthcare, and at risk of diseases such as outbreak of cholera. Sudanese rights groups have documented more than 2000 cases of enforced disappearances in Khartoum and other affected regions since the start of the war, with victims often detained by RSF or SAF, some killed under unclear circumstances. Detainees endure inhumane conditions, lacking medical care, proper food, and subjected to torture and sexual violence. Authorities in safer regions of Northern and Eastern Sudan dissolved resistance committees, active since the 2018 protests. Governors of five states prohibited information dissemination on social media, detaining journalists and activists in three states. Peaceful civic activities are banned or unauthorized in several states, creating hostile environments for WHRDs. The civic space in Sudan is closed with increasing militarization of the state and communities. During the last three months, Sudanese authorities launched a mobilization campaign to arm civilians, leading to unprecedented threats to women, peace and security and GBV in the areas out of the fighting zones. The Council will hold, on 1 March, an enhanced interactive dialogue on the comprehensive report of the HC, presented with the assistance of the designated Expert on human rights in the Sudan, on the situation of human rights in the Sudan. During the debate, States should reiterate joint civil society calls on the warring parties for an immediate ceasefire and the prompt creation of safe corridors for humanitarian aid organisations and groups, and to guarantee the safety of their operations; an immediate restoration of telecommunications across the country; and cease attacks on health facilities, medical supplies, and health workers, and uphold obligations under international humanitarian law. States should also declare their support for joint civil society calls on States to create an immediate long-term protection program for WHRDs; provide support for the FFM and other international mechanisms mandated to document human rights violations in Sudan, including by ensuring that these entities have the necessary resources to carry out their work effectively; support local initiatives providing humanitarian support to local communities as well as support services to victims, and to support civil society’s documentation and reporting efforts so that the evidence obtained can be used for future judicial proceedings; to call for the disclosure of the whereabouts of the disappeared and the release of detainees, and to urgently address the issue of enforced disappearances and grave violations in detention centers, including GBV; and to call for the reinforcement and protection of medical staff in accordance with international humanitarian law.
Tunisia
Since 25 July 2021, President Saied has dismantled Tunisia’s democratic institutions, undermined judicial independence, stifled the exercise of freedom of expression and repressed dissent. In June 2023, the High Commissioner urged Tunisia to ‘change course’, ‘respect due process and fair trial standards in all judicial proceedings, cease trying civilians before military courts and release all those arbitrarily detained’. He expressed ‘deep concern at the increasing restrictions on the right to freedom of expression and press freedom in Tunisia’, noting that vague legislation is being used to criminalise independent journalism and stifle criticism of the authorities. He further addressed the ongoing crackdown ‘against judges, politicians, labour leaders, businesspeople and civil society actors’. The situation has since further deteriorated. Authorities have continued to escalate their crackdown on free speech and peaceful dissent, using unfounded conspiracy, terrorism and expression-related charges against opposition figures, journalists, lawyers, judges and businesspeople. Public remarks from the president about the prosecution of perceived critics has continued to undermine judicial independence. At least 20 people have been in pretrial detention for long periods of time (8 months to more than two years). In November 2023, civil society organisations warned that the draft law on associations submitted to the Tunisian Parliament on 10 October 2023 would violate the right to freedom of association and endanger civic space in Tunisia. The draft law would grant the government pervasive control and oversight over the establishment, activities, operations and funding of independent groups, which are one of the last remaining counterweights to President Kais Saied’s autocratic rule. We urge States to call on Tunisia to refrain from adopting the proposed draft law and, instead, commit to safeguarding the right to freedom of association as enshrined in Decree-law 88 and under international human right law binding on Tunisia. The authorities should ensure that associations are able to operate without political interference, intimidation, harassment or undue restrictions. Moreover, Special Procedures have raised alarm at the collective expulsions targeting sub-Saharan migrants from Tunisia as well as ‘violence and racist hate speech, including perpetrated by the country’s top leadership and law enforcement officials’. While collective expulsions started being documented in early July, they are ongoing and target asylum seekers, refugees and children, to Libya and Algeria.
ISHR reiterates the recommendations by Tunisian civil society, Special Procedures and the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to put an end to these practices, and for the authorities to investigate, provide remedies to victims, and hold perpetrators accountable. Ukraine Two years on from the launch of Russia’s full scale invasion and war of aggression against Ukraine, the perpetration of which has involved the widespread commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity, it is vital that the Council continue to mandate mechanisms to investigate violations, promote accountability, support victims, and address root causes of conflict.
At the March session of the Council, this should include renewing the mandate of the Commission of Inquiry, the work of which is essential to promote accountability for atrocity crimes in Ukraine, as well as address root causes such as the repression and criminalisation of human rights defenders and independent journalists in Russia itself. The Council will hold an interactive dialogue with the Commission of Inquiry on 19 March. The Council will also hold an interactive dialogue on the OHCHR report on Ukraine on 2 April.
Venezuela The Human Rights Council session just as that Venezuela has suspended OHCHR activities in the country and ordered personnel to leave the country and amid a context of a foretold pre-electoral increase in threats and attacks against defenders.
The arbitrary detention and disappearance of human rights defender Rocío San Miguel, president of NGO Control Cuidadano, on 9 February is evidence of this and of a wider pattern of attacks against defenders, as noted by the UN fact-finding mission on Venezuela. The re-activation of the process related to a highly restrictive and much criticised NGO bill at the start of this year, is a sign of the government’s interest in restricting civil society’s ability to operate. This is no time to reduce efforts to demand the respect of human rights in the country including the respect of the rights of human rights defenders, and to express support for ongoing monitoring and reporting work by OHCHR in the country and by the UN Fact-Finding Mission. Venezuela will be the focus of two specific debates during the session. On 19 March, the High Commissioner will present an oral update informed by the conclusions and recommendations of his team in the country. The UN fact-finding mission will provide an oral update on the 20 March. Both of these updates will be followed by interactive dialogues. During this session, States must be of one voice in calling for the reactivation of the work of OHCHR in the country. Also, the immediate release of Rocío San Miguel and that of Javier Tarazona, arbitrarily detained almost three years ago. States must also express deep concern at the re-introduction of the NGO bill and call on the government to cease threats and attacks against defenders in the country. States should restate the importance of the work of Venezuelan defenders and commit to support their work politically and, where possible, financially. States must insist on the reestablishment of an effective OHCHR presence in the country and speak to the essential, ongoing work of the UN fact-finding mission, stressing upon Venezuela the importance of its cooperation with all the UN bodies and mechanisms with mandates related to Venezuela and with all Special Procedures. States’ participation in the two interactive dialogues on Venezuela – through individual and joint statements – is key to making evident that the human rights situation in the country and the UN’s monitoring and reporting mechanisms remain a priority and reassuring those demanding accountability for human rights violations in Venezuela that they are being heard.
Yemen In 2023, Mwatana documented the continuation of human rights violations committed by various conflicting parties in Yemen, including ground and aerial attacks, attacks on vital facilities, child recruitment, arbitrary detention, enforced disappearance, and torture, sexual violence, attacks on African migrants, denial of humanitarian access, as well as the the impact of the widespread presence of landmines and explosive devices. In 2023, over 40 civil society organisations, victims and survivor associations from Yemen launched the Yemen Declaration for Justice and Reconciliation, in which they set forth their common vision for achieving justice that is inclusive, victim-centred, and includes accountability, reparations, and redress.
ISHR calls on the international community to address the demands made by Yemeni civil society, including for an independent, impartial, and fair accountability for all crimes under international humanitarian law and international human rights law committed in Yemen, by all parties to the conflict. Failure to address atrocities in the past has led to a culture of impunity throughout generations. We urge the international community to take effective measures to assess the full extent of civilian harm in coordination with local civil society and call on parties to the conflict to ensure reparation and redress.
Other country situations The High Commissioner will provide an oral update to the Council on 4 March. The Council will consider updates, reports on and is expected to consider resolutions addressing a range of country situations, in some instances involving the renewal of the relevant expert mandates. These include: Interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Afghanistan Enhanced interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Eritrea ID with the Special Rapporteur on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and a presentation of the report of the High Commissioner Interactive Dialogue with the High Commissioner on Belarus Interactive dialogue on the High Commissioner oral update on Myanmar, and interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Iran and Interactive Dialogue on the comprehensive report of the independent international fact-finding mission Interactive Dialogue with the Commission of Inquiry on Syria Enhanced interactive dialogue on the comprehensive written report of the Commission on Human Rights’ South Sudan and the participation of the High Commissioner, and an interactive Dialogue on the OHCHR report on South Sudan High-level Dialogue with the Independent Expert on Central African Republic Interactive Dialogue with the High Commissioner and the Independent Expert on Haiti Interactive Dialogue with the International Expert on Colombia, and presentation of the report on the OHCHR activities in Colombia under General debate 2
Resolutions to be presented to the Council’s 55th session At the organisational meeting on 12 February the following resolutions were announced (States leading the resolution in brackets): Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization of, and discrimination, incitement to violence and violence against, persons based on religion or belief (Pakistan on behalf of the OIC) Human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the obligation to ensure accountability and justice (Pakistan on behalf of the OIC) Right of the Palestinian people to self-determination (Pakistan on behalf of the OIC) Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and in the occupied Syrian Golan (Pakistan on behalf of the OIC) Human rights in the occupied Syrian Golan (Pakistan on behalf of the OIC) Human rights and the environment (Costa Rica, Maldives, Morocco, Slovenia, Switzerland) – mandate renewal Prevention of genocide (Armenia) The right to work (Egypt, Greece, Indonesia, Mexico, Romania) The right to food (Cuba) Promotion of the enjoyment of the cultural rights of everyone and respect for cultural diversity (Cuba) – mandate renewal The effects of foreign debt and other related international financial obligations of States on the full enjoyment of all human rights (Cuba) The right to adequate housing (Brazil, Finland, Germany, Namibia) Combating violence, discrimination, and harmful practices against intersex persons (Australia, Chile, Finland ,South Africa) Human rights in Ukraine stemming from the Russian aggression (Ukraine) The role of States in countering the negative impact of disinformation on the enjoyment and realization of human rights (Ukraine, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, UK, US) The right to privacy in the digital age (Austria, Brazil, Germany, Liechtenstein, Mexico) – mandate renewal Cooperation with Georgia (Georgia) Situation of Human Rights in the Republic of South Sudan ( Albania, Norway, UK, US) – mandate renewal The human rights situation in the Syrian Arab Republic (United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, Jordan, the Netherlands, Qatar, Turkiye and the United States of America) – mandate renewal Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (Denmark) Promoting and strengthening a culture of peace (Gambia, Lesotho, Chile, Mozambique, South Sudan, Côte d’Ivoire, Kazakhstan, Botswana) The rights of persons belonging to minorities (Austria, Slovenia, Mexico) The right of persons with disabilities (New Zealand and Mexico) The situation of human rights in Belarus (European Union) The situation of human rights in the DPRK (European Union) – mandate renewal The situation of human rights in Myanmar (European Union) – mandate renewal Freedom of religion or belief (European Union) Rights of the child (EU and GRULAC) Situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran (Iceland, Moldova, North Macedonia, United Kingdom) and the deteriorating situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran, especially with respect to women and children (Iceland and Germany) – two mandate renewals in one resolution. Furthermore, according to the voluntary calendar for resolutions, it is possible that more resolutions could also be presented at this session. Read the calendar here.
Adoption of Universal Periodic Review (UPR) reports During this session, the Council will adopt the UPR working group reports on Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Burkina Faso, Cabo Verde, Cameroon, Canada, Colombia, Cuba, Djibouti, Germany, Russian Federation, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uzbekistan. ISHR supports human rights defenders in their interaction with the UPR. We publish and submit briefing papers regarding the situation facing human rights defenders in some States under review and advocate for the UPR to be used as a mechanism to support and protect human rights defenders on the ground.
ISHR is organising a side event on 6 March at 13:00 (CET) on the role of defenders in fostering accountability for atrocity crimes. Further information will be published on ISHR’s website.
ISHR is co-organising a side event ‘The situation for exiled Nicaraguan activists a year after being released and stripped of nationality’ on 5 March, 15.30-16.30pm (CET), Room XXVII, Palais de Nations. Other co-organisers include the Permanent Missions of Argentina, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Ecuador and Paraguay, as well as NGOs CCPR, Race and Equality and PBI. ISHR is co-organising a side event, ‘Resisting Exile: Voices of Human Rights Defenders’ on 5 March, 2pm Palais de Nations, along with CCPR and Race and Equality.
Photo: Freedom of Speech Includes The Press by Narih Lee under CC 2.0
INVITATION to the side event: IN DEFENCE OF CIVIC SPACE AND DEMOCRACY SUPPORTING THE WORK OF HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS on Monday 26 February 2024, 1pm – 2pm CET, Room XXII, Palais des Nations, Geneva
Human rights defenders promote democracy and a vibrant civic space, too often, in dangerous circumstances. This event aims to discuss the crucial work of defenders, how the international community can best support them and how crucial gender equality is for the full realisation of democracy.
Speakers:
Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, Leader of democratic forces (Belarus)
Dr. Sara Abdelgalil, Paediatric Consultant NHS UK, Democracy & Governance Advocate, Active member of Sudanese Diaspora
Phil Lynch, Executive Director, International Service for Human Rights
Elina Valtonen, Minister for Foreign Affairs, Finland
Moderator: Imogen Foulkes, BBC Geneva
A light lunch will be served. The event will be recorded and published as a podcast (Inside Geneva, produced by Swiss Broadcasting).
On 13 February 2024, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk urged EU leaders to approve a ground-breaking agreement on business and human rights, amid reports that support for the measure may now be in question in the European Council.
“The adoption of the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive would show historic leadership by the EU at a time when global leadership in support of human rights is needed more than ever,” said Türk.
“For the past four years, work on the Directive has seen unprecedented involvement by many stakeholders, including business and my Office, as well as political commitment from EU institutions and Member States to push it forward. This process has truly raised hopes of ensuring more effective management of human rights risks by large companies.”
“For the Directive to fail now would be a massive blow,” he said.
The EU-wide Directive would require certain large EU and non-EU companies to take reasonable steps to identify and address adverse human rights risks.
“Human rights due diligence is feasible and supports sustainable business processes that deliver long-term value to society at large. And for those reasons it also makes eminent business sense,” said Türk.
Many of the companies that would fall within the Directive’s scope have backed its adoption. It would create a level playing field by harmonizing disparate rules across jurisdictions.
“The agreement on the Directive is reported to be substantially aligned with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and other relevant international human rights standards. I am convinced the Directive can make a positive contribution to respect for human rights, and its adoption would send an important message of solidarity to those at risk from business activities,” the UN Human Rights Chief said.
A vote on the Directive is possibly due later this week.
A new UN report claims that, between 2001 and 2021, 30% of outspoken Thai activists experienced violence resulting in a loss of life, by the businesses against which they had campaigned. Released by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), on 11 February 2024, the report says that businesses have used legal action, intimidation and violence to silence human rights defenders.
The categories of abuse faced by human rights defenders, per the report.
Activists, affected villagers and attorneys are among the groups considered to be human rights defenders in the report. Over the last 25 years, businesses filed 109 lawsuits against human rights defenders. 68.9% of these were by those with stakes in the mining, livestock and energy industries.
One anonymous interviewee said the lawsuits are used as strategic roadblocks and that they found themselves “going to court approximately once a month, incurring expenses and losing time.” Outside of the judicial system, human rights defenders were reportedly spied upon, or threatened with violence and job loss.
“After making a turn in my car, someone fired shots at me,” claims another anonymous interviewee, adding “I was in the orchard, a single home in the orchard. It was dark. Five shots were fired. I did not report the case, thinking it was an act of intimidation.”
4% of human rights defenders have died or been forcibly disappeared in the 25 years covered by the report, published on February 12th, the International Day for the Prevention of Violent Extremism.
In 2015, Thailand pledged to work towards the fulfilment of the UN’s 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), alongside other members of the organisation. SDG 16, one of the goals, asks countries to “uphold peace, justice and strong institutions,” and another, SDG 10, aims for “reduced inequalities”.
The report recommends that government and relevant agencies recognize the status and importance of human rights defenders and develop measures that protect them from violence and harassment.
On 16 February, 2024 Sandra Epal Ratjen & Nicolas Agostini in Global Rights reported on a UN consultation on law enforcement’s role in peaceful protests which brought together practitioners and human rights defenders.
Over two days in Geneva, the UN special rapporteur on freedoms of peaceful assembly and association, Clément Voule, the UN Human Rights Office (OHCHR), and the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) convened a consultation on the facilitation of peaceful protests by law enforcement. The event followed several regional workshops, organized in accordance with Human Rights Council resolution 50/21, which requested that the special rapporteur develop “technical and practical tools . . . to assist law enforcement officials in promoting and protecting human rights in the context of peaceful protests.” There was nothing unusual in this format—or in the event’s title. But despite its attractive feel (at least for human rights geeks), it ran the risk of turning into yet another academic discussion replete with theorizing but offering little in the way of practical solutions.
It turned out to be one of the most refreshing, engaging, and action-oriented human rights dialogues we’ve attended.
It’s about the makeup
What made the event rather unusual was its makeup. In addition to civil society members (public assembly, law enforcement, torture, and rule of law specialists attended), the consultation brought together practitioners from all over the world. By “practitioners,” we mean not just police watchdogs (oversight bodies and disciplinary authorities) but police officers and commanders, all on active duty.
While some activists would draw back with a wince, those human rights defenders and organizations who were present engaged with an open mind, as did law enforcement personnel. Participants weren’t going to talk amongst themselves or only preach to the converted. They were going to try to bring about an actionable outcome. After all, their aim was to devise how law enforcement can facilitate peaceful assemblies and protect rights in such contexts.
Peer pressure was minimal. On all sides, there was nothing to “prove”: no need to adopt an intransigent position, no need to show you’re smart, no need to cajole anyone—there were only incentives to share expertise and experience.
Sure, there were precedents. Recent workshops brought together practitioners and outlined best practices. For instance, the “Istanbul Process” meeting on promoting religious tolerance held in Singapore was practitioner-centric. Since then, however, the Istanbul Process has collapsed as the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) revived the “defamation of religions” agenda.
Without naïveté but considering the “real-world” nature of the outputs of this process, we’re confident that the work done under the auspices of Clément Voule, OHCHR, and UNODC will, to some extent, enhance human rights compliance in police practice and benefit both peaceful protesters and law enforcement officials. Notably, the outcome documents are less technical than most human rights documents.
It’s also about the substance
The consultation was also innovative because of its hands-on approach. In addition to the main working document, a “Model Protocol” for the law enforcement facilitation of peaceful protests, the project led by Clément Voule and his team, OHCHR, and UNODC will produce a “Handbook” and a “Checklist” for law enforcement professionals. The latter two will be practical documents guiding police practice.
The magnitude and diversity of experiences in the room meant that discussions were light-years away from sterile sloganeering or divisive debates—the kind we see on social media. On civil society’s side, no one advocated “defunding the police.” On the police side, no one advocated for qualified immunity. All participants created a fertile ground for dialogue on how to ensure human rights-compliant, competent, and respected law enforcement that is able to facilitate, not hinder, public assemblies.
Civil society participants recognized the need for well-funded, well-trained police. We kept in mind (and were reminded of) the realities of the job—what the average law enforcement officer faces daily. The challenges include understaffing, lack of adequate training, and, quite simply, fear (facing a crowd, even peaceful, will never feel like sitting on your sofa sipping a Whiskey Sour). Law enforcement participants, for their part, recognized the need for accountable police behavior and to confront discrimination and abuses of power. They kept in mind (and were reminded) that to be respectful is a sine qua non to be respected.
Also reviewed were “prior to protest,” “during protest,” and “after protest” issues, plus the situation of specific groups and accountability for violations. One section addressed police well-being, which is essential to human rights compliance, as strained police officers are much more likely to engage in misconduct. We didn’t shy away from addressing sensitive issues—police brutality, accountability, or budgeting.
It wasn’t an echo chamber, but participants agreed on key points. Among others: the role of police vs. the role of prosecution; the need for effective communication between protesters and police, de-escalation, and adequate training for police officers; or the fact that a clear distinction must always be made between peaceful and non-peaceful elements of an assembly.
It was a far cry from the way these conversations unfold online, and once again, one can see the toxicity of social media. Instead of fostering healthy discussions (differences aren’t that wide between most people), social media algorithms artificially promote simplistic views, entrench positions, and elevate the most divisive topics. This process distracts those seeking solutions from problem-solving. No one benefits from this situation—certainly not rights-holders.
Don’t forget political will
Assuredly, the outcomes of this consultation will go unheeded in many countries, where protests are rare or police have total impunity. Elsewhere, not much will happen without political will.
But the beauty of this consultation is that political will to facilitate assemblies won’t need to come from the highest level. Once publicly available, the outcome documents—particularly the Handbook and Checklist, with their guidelines on communication, de-escalation, and risk assessment regarding protests—will be available for law enforcement agencies and officers at all levels to use. The ideal scenario, of course, will be governments publicly committing to using the outcome documents.
The final documents will stem from a dialogue that brought together people with hands-on experience who tried to build bridges and maximize their chances of having an impact on the ground. This model should inform future human rights dialogues.
The Protocol, Handbook, and Checklist will be presented at the next session of the UN Human Rights Council, February 26–April 5, 2024. Clément Voule will make his last appearance as special rapporteur. For his successor—and for all people of goodwill who want to see peaceful protests proceed without hindrance, as well as rights-compliant law enforcement, joint work will be needed to popularize, operationalize, and implement the documents.
‘Our impact may be large, may be small, and may be nothing. But we must try. It is our duty to the dispossessed and it is the right of civil society.’ – Cao Shunli
Ten years ago, Chinese woman human rights defender Cao Shunli was a victim of deadly reprisals for engaging with the United Nations.
The International Service for Human Rights (ISHR) and partners invite you to attend a photo exhibition on 14 March 2024, at Place des Nations to honour her memory.
Cao Shunli was a brave Chinese woman human rights defender and lawyer. She campaigned for the meaningful consultation and contribution of independent civil society to the Chinese government’s national reports for its first and second Universal Periodic Reviews (UPR). On 14 September 2013, one month before this review, while on her way to Geneva to attend a human rights training organised by ISHR and CHRD, she was detained and forcibly disappeared by Chinese authorities for five weeks. When she resurfaced in custody in October 2013, she had been charged with ‘picking quarrels and provoking trouble’, and it was evident that she was experiencing serious medical issues in detention. Despite repeated international calls for her urgent release over months of being denied adequate medical treatment, Cao Shunli died of multiple organ failure on 14 March 2014, having been granted bail for medical reasons just days before her death. Cao Shunli was one of the finalists of the prestigious Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders in 2014. [see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/tag/cao-shunli/ as well as https://www.martinennalsaward.org/hrd/cao-shunli/]
To this day, Chinese authorities have ignored appeals seeking accountability for Cao’s death, including repeated calls by UN Special Procedures experts in 2014 and 2019 for a full investigation into this ‘deadly reprisal’. Her case remains the longest-standing unresolved case in the UN Secretary-General’s annual reports on reprisals. March 2024 marks the 10th anniversary of Cao Shunli’s death. A decade ago, when ISHR and many other human rights groups sought to observe a moment of silence at the Human Rights Council in her memory, the Chinese delegation, together with other delegations, disrupted the session for an hour and a half. China is consistently one of the most frequent perpetrators of reprisals against individuals or groups engaging with the United Nations. Frequently mentioned alongside Saudi Arabia, it has the second highest number of reprisals cases and situations reported by the UN Secretary-General since 2010.
Cao Shunli’s story is a paradigmatic case of reprisals, not only because of her belief in the importance of civil society participation in UN mechanisms, but also due to the array of severe human rights abuses she endured because of this belief, ranging from being barred from exiting her own country, enforced disappearance, arbitrary detention, lack of due process, torture, ill-treatment, and denial of adequate medical care, to subsequent death in custody without any accountability for these abuses.
On 15 February 2024 AP carried the story that Venezuela’s government has ordered the local UN office on human rights to suspend operations, giving its staff 72 hours to leave, after accusing the office of promoting opposition to the South American country. The UN office was established in Caracas in September 2019.
The foreign affairs minister, Yván Gil, announced the decision at a news conference in Caracas on Thursday. Gil’s announcement came on the heels of the detention of the human rights attorney Rocío San Miguel, which set off a wave of criticism inside and outside Venezuela.
The South American country’s government said it had made a decision “to suspend the activities of the technical advisory office of the UN high commissioner for human rights and carry out a holistic revision of the technical cooperation terms”.
The government said the UN human rights office must rectify its “colonialist, abusive and violating attitude”, accusing it of playing an “inappropriate role” in the country and supporting impunity for people involved in attempts at assassination, coups, conspiracies and other plots.
The Venezuelan government regularly accuses members of the political opposition of plotting takeovers or the assassination of President Nicolas Maduro, all accusations vehemently denied by opposing parties and their members.
“We regret this announcement and are evaluating the next steps. We continue to engage with the authorities and other stakeholders,” said UN human rights office spokesperson Ravina Shamdasani. “Our guiding principle has been and remains the promotion and protection of the human rights of the people of Venezuela.”
Venezuelan state television on Wednesday harshly criticized comments by the UN’s special rapporteur on the right to food, Michael Fakhri, who just concluded a visit to Venezuela. Fakhri had said in a statement the government food program does not tackle the root causes of hunger and is susceptible to political influences.
San Miguel was taken into custody on Friday at the airport near Caracas while she and her daughter awaited a flight to Miami. Authorities did not acknowledge her detention until Sunday, and as of Wednesday her attorney had not been allowed to meet with her.
San Miguel’s daughter, ex-husband, two brothers and former partner were also detained following her arrest. Of them, only her former partner remains in custody.
Stay up-to-date by following 
Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards 