via Chen Guangcheng pressures the EU on secret human rights talks with China – Telegraph.
share information on human rights defenders, with special focus on human rights awards and laureates

(Photo credit: HRNJ-Uganda website)
Freedom House got carried away a bit when it published the following:
Freedom House would like to congratulate Ugandan human rights activist Geoffrey Wokulira Ssebaggala, on being awarded the European Union Human Rights Defender Award for the year 2012. Ssebaggala is one of the founding members of the Human Rights Network for Journalists-Uganda (HRNJ-Uganda) and has been its National Coordinator since 2009. He was honored for his efforts in defending media rights, recording and highlighting restrictions on freedom of expression and access to information, as well as attacks on journalists. Ssebaggala is certainly a most deserved winner, but when Freedom House states: “The European Union established the award to raise awareness about the work of individual human rights defenders (HRDs) around the world. [emphasis added]” it exaggerates quite a bit as is made clear by the EU delegation in Kampala in 2011 when it created the purely national award http://www.deluga.ec.europa.eu/index.php/delegation-activities-in-uganda/political-press-information/press-and-info/news-releases/182-new-new-new-eu-local-hrd-awards-nominations.
IFEX at the end of its congratulatory piece at least recognises the local character of the award. http://www.ifex.org/uganda/2013/04/24/award_freedom/
Freedom House Grantee Receives the European Union Human Rights Defender Award | Freedom House.
Interesting example of how NGO pressure can have effect on the EU: last December, FIDH organised a round of advocacy with its Vice-President and Laureate of the MEA 2006, Arnold Tsunga, to convey to the European Union its concerns around the ongoing risks for human rights defenders in the context of political deadlock and pre-electoral period [“Zimbabwe: Ongoing risks for human rights defenders in the context of political deadlock and pre-electoral period”, report of the Observatory for the protection of human rights defenders published in November 2012.] FIDH’s objective was to gear up the EU’s attention to ensure early warning and appropriate reaction in case of human rights violations taking place in the electoral cycle staring with the upcoming referendum on the new Constitution before the holding of Presidential elections in the summer of this year. FIDH’s advocacy was reflected in the European Parliament’s prompt reaction to the arrest of Okay Machisa, National Executive Director of ZimRights, and two other ZimRights members Leo Chamahwinya, Dorcas Shereni through an urgent resolution adopted on 7 February, which also relays the Observatory report recommendations. In addition, the EU Delegation and Heads of Missions in Harare issued a Statement on 22 February to indicate the EU’s particular concern around the pattern of incidents of harassment against civil society organisations and to call on the authorities to demonstrate impartiality in their relation to civil society. 
via Zimbabwe : UE pays particular attention to the situation of … – FIDH.
REPUBLICAKATHMANDU reported on 2 April that a high-level delegation of the German parliament [Bundestag] is arriving in Kathmandu on 8 April to get first hand information about latest human rights situation in Nepal. A four-member delegation of German parliamentarians led by Michael Brand, deputy chairman of the Committee for Human Rights and Humanitarian Aid, will arrive in Kathmandu for a four-day visit to Nepal. “The objective of the visit is to exchange views on the current human rights situation in Nepal with human rights defenders and members of the Nepali civil society. The delegation wants to receive first hand information about the recent developments in Nepal,” said Tika Prasad Dhakal, political advisor at the German Embassy in Kathmandu. During the visit, the delegation is scheduled to meet representatives of government, Supreme Court, trade unions, media, human rights community and political parties as well as the German development coöperation partners. The high level visit of German parliamentarians comes amid protest from various quarters over some of the controversial provisions in the proposed Truth and Reconciliation Commission TRC. The diplomatic community, including European Union EU, have already expressed strong reservation over the proposed TRC, which they say aims to grant general amnesty even to those involved in serious cases of human rights violations.
Chris Collier has written a very practical Training Guide for human rights NGOs and activists to help you through the complex maze of EU and its obscure machinery. It is jam-packed with useful tips and brings to you every EU tool available. It helps to spot the most appropriate actors for different types of action. This guide comes with a toolkit that provides you with a compilation of good practices showcasing how other NGOs have achieved the desired impact.
http://www.euromedrights.org/eng/2013/01/15/emhrn-training-guide-and-toolkit-on-eu-advocacy/
Young Armenians aged from 17 to 25 can take part in a short (three minute long) film contest on human rights in the digital age by sending their submissions to the United Nations Department of Public Information (UN-DPI) in Armenia by 5 December. The contest is being organised by the UN-DPI, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the UN Population Fund, the OSCE Office in Yerevan, the Council of Europe in Armenia and the EU Delegation to Armenia, with the support of the Human Rights Defenders Office.
Dutch MEP for D66, Marietje Schaake wrote a short but good piece in New Europe about the need for a overall EU strategy with regard to ‘digital freedom’. Concerning HRDs she has the following to say: “Generally speaking, the fight for control and power by authoritarian regimes involves a growing ICT component. While training human rights defenders, journalists and dissidents should improve their safety online it also creates a new set of sensitivities and a potentially dangerous dependency on the accuracy and quality of the guidance. Human rights defenders deserve EU support and in any case should not be targeted with tools and technologies developed and exported from within the EU.”
via The need for an EU Digital Freedom Strategy | New Europe.
The European Parliament adopts every year a Resolution based on the report it receives on the EU’s human rights action and policy. So, it did again on 18 April 2012.
It is quite a long resolution and I only copy here the general paragraphs relevant to Human Rights Defenders (the chapter also includes a somewhat ill-fitting paragraph 91 on Western Sahara and a correct but detailed observation re the Sacharov prize in para 93, which you can consult in the full text):
…….
Re Human rights defenders
87. Welcomes the EU’s political commitment to supporting human rights defenders, as a long-established component of the EU’s human rights external relations policy, and the many positive examples of demarches, trial observations, prison visits, and other concrete actions undertaken by EU missions and delegations, such as regular, institutionalised meetings with human rights defenders, but remains concerned at the lack of implementation of the EU Guidelines on Human Rights Defenders in some third countries; considers that the VP/HR should make recommendations for enhanced action to those missions where implementation has been noticeably weak;
88. Urges the EU and its Member States to encourage EU missions and delegations to show their support and solidarity for the work undertaken by human rights defenders and their organisations, by regularly meeting and proactively engaging with them and incorporating their contributions into the development of the specific country strategies on human rights and democracy, and regularly engaging with Parliament;
89. Reiterates its call on the EU to systematically raise individual cases of human rights defenders in the ongoing human rights dialogues it has with those third countries where human rights defenders continue to suffer harassment and attacks;
90. Stresses the importance of systematic follow up to contacts with independent civil society, as well as more direct and easier access for human rights defenders to EU Delegations in third countries; welcomes the appointment of liaison officers, in the Delegations and/or in Member State embassies, for human rights defenders, and stresses that these should be experienced and appropriately trained officials whose functions are well-publicised both internally and externally; very much welcomes the fact that the VP/HR has indicated that she will always meet with human rights defenders in the course of her visits to third countries and calls for this practice to be followed by all Commissioners with responsibilities in the external relations field, and for reports on these contacts to be made available to Parliament;
91…….
92. Reiterates its call for greater inter-institutional cooperation on human rights defenders; considers that the EU’s response capacity and the coherence between the actions of the different institutions on urgent crises for human rights defenders would be well served by a shared alert system based on focal points, and encourages the EEAS and the Commission to explore this avenue further with the European Parliament;
93. ……
94. Undertakes to include women’s rights more systematically in its own human rights debates and resolutions and to use the Sakharov Prize network, and especially female winners of the Prize, to advocate women’s rights in the world;
A specialised but very concrete source of assistance is announced : the Fund for Indigenous Peoples Human Rights Defenders at Risk for urgent needs of indigenous human rights defenders, funded by the EU
via Asia: Fund For Indigenous Peoples Human Rights Defenders At Risk.