Posts Tagged ‘HRW’

Editorial “Waiting for Lefty” regrets absence of human rights concern in debate

October 18, 2012

In an editorial “Waiting for Lefty”, William Fisher (former government official – http://billfisher.blogspot.com) muses about the final debate between Obama and Romney and concludes that there was a glaring lack of reference to the human rights issues that dominated the first election campaign. The relevant part reads:

Obama started out in 2010 with the electoral wind at his back. On his first day in office he vowed to close the military prison at Guantnamo Bay, where detainees slated to have been released months — years — ago are still there, exactly where they started and no closer to freedom for the innocent. Scary because they weren’t released. Except the ones who committed suicide. They’re back home now.

When the electoral air was all filled with “hope and change” and “yes, we can, “Was Obama simply pandering to the Left — whose votes were a big help in getting him elected? After all, if he threw them all under a bus at this stage, where could they go? Vote for Romney? No way. Not vote at all? A possibility.

More disenchanted bodies widening the enthusiasm gap — and that could cost the president his job in a close election. And if he beats Romney, he will have to contend, in his second term, with a large and growing gaggle of organizations that have only one overarching interest — the restoration of human rights and the return to the rule of law.

But in a second Obama term, I would not expect hundreds of groups like Human Rights Watch, Amnesty, and Human Rights First — and thousands of individual human rights defenders –– to be quite so patient and seemingly understand as their first-term counterparts.

OpEdNews – Article: Waiting for Lefty.

HRW’s Moscow Researcher Threatened

October 8, 2012
<nyt_text>

According to the NY Times a researcher in Human Rights Watch’s office in Moscow received repeated threats this week of an attack focused on her pregnancy, the rights group said, calling it the latest example of escalating pressure against rights and civic groups in Russia.

Natalia Kolesnikova/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Tanya Lokshina, a senior Human Rights Watch researcher, spoke to reporters in Moscow on Thursday.

 

The anonymous threats were sent to the cellphone of the researcher, Tanya Lokshina, who is also the deputy director of the Moscow bureau. The group said they included details that could have been obtained only by eavesdropping on her telephone conversations.

“These threats demonstrate that the sender clearly was following Tanya’s every move,” said Kenneth Roth, the executive director of Human Rights Watch. “They knew where she lived, what she was doing. They made explicit reference to the fact of her pregnancy. They threatened harm to herself and to her unborn baby.”

……..

“This is not the first time members of our organization, and the Moscow office, have been threatened,” Ms. Lokshina said. “But the level of cynicism, the ugliness in the threats that came to my phone over those three days was unprecedented.”The threats stopped Monday, the day Human Rights Watch reported them to the Russian police, prosecutors, officials in the federal government and the Federal Security Service, the domestic intelligence agency that is a successor to the K.G.B.

However, on Thursday, another employee of the office received a text, again threatening Ms. Lokshina’s pregnancy and mentioning the group’s news conference scheduled for later in the day.

Human Rights Watch Says Its Moscow Researcher Threatened – NYTimes.com.

US-based NGOs enter presidential race with recommendations on HRDs

August 10, 2012

Back from a long break, I start with a substantive post although I dod not have to do much writing. Last week 22 human rights organizations – including the 3 on the Jury of the MEA: AI, HRW, HRF – issued a common report listing the ten most pressing issues for the next US President. Stewart M. Patrick of the Council of Foreign Relations in his blog the Internationalist made my life easy by summarizing the point (see his: http://blogs.cfr.org/patrick/2012/08/07/ten-critical-human-rights-issues-for-the-next-president/). For the text of point 4 relating to HRDs, go to the full document in PDF: http://www.freedomhouse.org/article/ten-critical-human-rights-challenges-next-american-president

1)      Prioritize U.S. leadership on international norms and universality of human rights: Despite the flaws of multilateral bodies like the UN Human Rights Council, they provide crucial legitimacy to U.S. pressure for human rights. Notably, the report points out that engagement is necessary, however frustrating it may be: “By withdrawing from these institutions or restricting funding, the United States forfeits its leadership…and undermines of [sic] its ability to advance its own interests.”

2)      Act to prevent genocide and mass atrocities and ensure accountability: The next president should build on the painstaking progress that NGOs and governments have achieved over the past decades by sustaining political will and “matching resources to rhetoric…The next administration should support the APB [Atrocities Prevention Board] and provide it with the necessary resources.” In addition, going it with others, versus going it alone, lends legitimacy to U.S. atrocity-prevention efforts and helps defray suspicions that the United States is purely acting  for self-interested political reasons.

3)      Pursue policies that protect people from the threat of terrorism while respecting human rights both at home and abroad: Balancing human rights and terrorist prevention remains an enormous challenge. Specifically, the report recommends two steps: end indefinite detention without charge or trial, and publicly clarify the criteria for lethal targeting and rendition. While terrorism understandably prompts desire for urgent and harsh action, sacrificing human rights at home and abroad carries dangerous, long-term consequences.

4)      Oppose the coordinated global assault on civil society, including the murder, criminalization, and vilification of human rights defenders: This is not a simple task, but the authors offer five actionable steps to mitigate the worst effects of repressive regimes from Ethiopia to Belarus to Venezuela, such as U.S. funding to civil society and media organizations and guidelines for U.S. agencies to support human rights defenders.

5)      Proactively address the democracy and human rights opportunities and challenges presented by the Arab Uprisings: Among a number of recommendations, the report notes that the Obama administration’s “limited pressure for reform” toward Arab monarchies has been disappointing, and that the next administration should condition military aid to Bahrain on progress toward political reform, more forcefully pressure Egypt’s military to transfer power to an elected government, and step up diplomatic and economic pressure on Syria’s Assad regime.

6)      Ensure that corporations avoid contributing to human rights violations in their operations and through their supply chains: The ten actionable steps presented in the report provide feasible options to reduce horrifying violations of human rights in many corporation’s global supply chains. They include implementation of the 1977 Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and ensuring that it “is not amended to erode the core intent of the law” as well as releasing “final rules for Sections 1502 and 1504 of the Dodd-Frank Act” (PDF) and implementing the law “in line with congressional intent.”

7)      Bolster accountability and access to services and justice for survivors of sexual and gender-based violence: The horrors of mass rapes, sexual assault, female genital mutilation, human trafficking, “so-called ‘honor killings,’ ” forced marriage, and domestic violence require a “deeper and more thorough response.” Along with continuing to press for accountability and enforcing a zero-tolerance policy for gender-based crimes perpetrated by U.S. government employees or contractors, the next administration should “expand support for international programs that increase access to health care, educational opportunities, and judicial institutions for girls and women” and increase visas for victims of gender-based violence.

8)      Review the United States’ relationships and alliances with governments that violate human rights:  This has consistently been one of the most difficult lines to walk. Regarding relationships with authoritarian regimes, the authors argue that “Washington policymakers often underestimate the political and moral capital America has, or refuse to use it.” They add, “Despite the recognition that the United States’ largely uncritical partnerships with repressive regimes in the Middle East undermined long-term U.S. interests, old mistakes are being repeated around the world. The United States has largely neglected human rights as it collaborated on counterterrorism with Ethiopia, Saudi Arabia, and other authoritarian partners.” Therefore, the authors call on the next U.S. president to review U.S. relations with authoritarian governments with a fresh perspective. In addition, U.S. diplomats on the ground should engage with democracy activists or civil society groups. The administration should also introduce targeted visa bans and asset freezes on foreign government officials implicated in rights violations.

9)      Support international justice and accountability for human rights violators present in the United States: To reduce impunity for gross violations of international law, such as genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes, the United States must support accountability for leaders or compatriots who carry out heinous abuses. As I have written previously, the false peace-justice tradeoff is no reason to go easy on the most violent dictators. To further this progress, the report urges the next administration to “close legal loopholes in the federal war-crimes law and press for crimes against humanity committed abroad to be a federal crime so human rights violators in the United States can be held to account.”

10)   Support policies at home and abroad that respect the rights of asylum seekers, refugees, migrants, and immigrants: The authors lament that the United States “has failed, in a number of ways, to protect the human rights of refugees and migrants.” Regrettably, the report continues, “the United States detained nearly 400,000 asylum seekers and immigrants last year, often without individual assessments or prompt court review of detention” and the list goes on of documented U.S. violations of migrant and refugee rights, as confirmed by both bipartisan domestic reviews and international observer missions. As the report lays out, the next administration must reform the U.S. immigration detention system, stop fostering racial profiling through immigration enforcement, and ensure accountability for human rights abuses by the Border Patrol and at points of entry. Protecting human rights must start at home.

http://www.freedomhouse.org/article/ten-critical-human-rights-challenges-next-american-president

Somalia, Child Soldiers Video by HRW on YouTube

February 23, 2012

Human Rights Watch (HRW)  uploaded on 18 February 2012 a short, crisp video about the recruitment of child soldiers in Somalia by Al-Shabaab.

 

Somalia, Child Soldiers – YouTube.

Human Rights Watch annual report with focus on 2011 ‘Arab Spring’

January 23, 2012

On 22 january Human Rights Watch (HRW) published its World Report 2012.  The 676-page report summarizes major rights issues in more than 90 countries, reflecting the extensive investigative work carried out in 2011 by its staff. On events in the Middle East and North Africa, Human Rights Watch said that firm and consistent international support for peaceful protesters and government critics is the best way to pressure the region’s autocrats to end abuses and enhance basic freedoms. A principled insistence on respect for rights is also the best way to help popular movements steer clear of the intolerance, lawlessness, and revenge that can threaten a revolution from within, Human Rights Watch said………
The repercussions of the Arab Spring have been felt around the world, Human Rights Watch said. Leaders in China, ZimbabweNorth KoreaEthiopia, Vietnam, and Uzbekistan seem to be living in fear of the precedent of people ousting their autocratic governments. But even democracies such as India, Brazil, and South Africa have been reluctant to support change.  Relying on outmoded views of human rights promotion as imperialism and ignoring the international support that their own people historically enjoyed when seeking their rights, these democracies often failed at the United Nations to stand with people facing repression.
Human Rights Watch said the international community could play an important role in fostering the growth of rights-respecting democracies in the Middle East and North Africa. Rather than refusing to countenance the rise of political Islam, as sometimes occurred in the past, democratic governments should recognize that political Islam may represent a majority preference, Human Rights Watch said. However, the international community should insist that Islamist governments abide by international human rights obligations, particularly with respect to women’s rights and religious freedom, as with any government.
………….
“Rights-respecting governments should support international justice regardless of political considerations.  It’s misguided to believe that allowing countries to sweep past abuses under the rug will somehow avoid encouraging future atrocities,” Roth said. “As we mark the first anniversary of the Arab Spring, we should stand firmly for the rights and aspirations of the individual over the spoils of the tyrant.”

World Report 2012: Strengthen Support for ‘Arab Spring’ | Human Rights Watch.

Israel refuses to let HRD Shawan Jabarin travel to receive award in Denmark

November 30, 2011
Map showing the West Bank and Gaza Strip in re...

Image via Wikipedia

On 29 November 29, 2011 Israeli authorities turned West Bank resident Shawan Jabarin, the director of the Palestinian human rights group Al-Haq, back at the Allenby Bridge crossing with Jordan, citing a travel ban. Several NGOs, such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and B’Tselem, said that the Israeli authorities violated Jabarin’s rights in imposing the ban and have not produced any evidence that would justify continuing to restrict him from travel.

The travel ban would seem to be clearly linked to his human rights work as Jabarin was stopped since 2006, when he became director of Al-Haq, a leading human rights organization in the West Bank, while Israel had allowed him to travel abroad eight times in the previous seven years. The Israeli military previously claimed in court that Jabarin was an activist in the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, which Israel considers a terrorist organization, and that his travel abroad for even a limited period would endanger Israel’s security. However, Israeli authorities have not charged Jabarin with any crime or given him an opportunity to confront the allegations against him. The Israeli High Court of Justice has upheld Jabarin’s travel ban on security grounds, but did so based on secret information that Jabarin and his lawyer were not allowed to see or challenge. “It is hard to believe any claim that Jabarin’s travel to Denmark to receive a human rights award would harm Israeli security, the more so when any evidence is kept secret,” said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. “While civil society groups recognize Jabarin’s courageous work, Israel is punishing him with a travel ban.”

The ban has prevented Jabarin from leaving the West Bank to receive a human rights prize from the Danish PL Foundation (Poul Lauritzen), participate in a European Union forum on human rights, and attend a Human Rights Watch meeting in New York City.  “The ban preventing Shawan Jabarin from traveling abroad to receive an award is emblematic of the arbitrary restrictions placed on Palestinian human rights defenders and civil society activists,” said Philip Luther, Amnesty International’s MENA Programme Director. “It must be lifted, and the Israeli authorities must stop using unspecified security concerns to obstruct the work of Palestinian human rights activists.”  Nina Atallah, the head of Al-Haq’s monitoring and documentation department, will try to travel to the prize ceremony.

It is a pity that Israel,in this respect, is emulating Iran, which is the only country until now to prevent the MEA Laureate Emad Baghi to travel to his ceremony in 2009.
Related articles