Posts Tagged ‘Human Rights Defenders’

JOINT NGO LETTER asks to suspend EU-CHINA HUMAN RIGHTS DIALOGUE 2024

June 17, 2024

On 12 June 2024, a group of important NGOs addressed the following letter to Josep Borrell, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs:

We, the undersigned civil society organisations, are writing to reiterate our request for the European Union to suspend its human rights dialogue with China, and to consider other, more impactful measures at the EU’s disposal to address the Chinese government’s assault on human rights at home and abroad.

While appreciative of the open and frank discussion and engagement with the EEAS in preparation of each round of human rights dialogue with China, we regret that the EU continues this exercise despite its amply proven ineffectiveness over 38 rounds. While the EU raises concerns during these dialogues, it knows that the Chinese government will not acknowledge abuses, will not undertake any effort to secure accountability, and will not be persuaded to undertake any policy or legislative action to comply with China’s international human rights obligations. The EU’s reluctance to establish any measurable benchmark of progress, or even to establish clearly defined objectives beyond having a dialogue, exacerbates the ineffectiveness of this exercise.

This year’s human rights dialogue would also entail EU officials sitting down with authorities in Beijing to “engage… through dialogue and cooperation” on human rights, days after the 35th anniversary of the Tiananmen massacre.

Since Xi Jinping came to power in 2013, the Chinese government has intensified its crackdown on dissent, harassing and imprisoning human rights defenders and activists including the Swedish bookseller Gui Minhai, the Uyghur economist and Sakharov Prize laureate Ilham Tohti [7 human rights awards, see: https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/laureates/37AE7DC4-16DB-51E9-4CF8-AB0828AEF491], the Hong-Kong barrister and human rights activist Chow Hang-tung and human rights lawyers Yu Wensheng and his wife Xu Yan, who were arrested a little over a year ago on their way to meet with the EU delegation [see: https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/laureates/69fc7057-b583-40c3-b6fa-b8603531248e and https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2023/07/12/new-wave-of-repression-against-human-rights-lawyers-unleashed-in-china/]. The Chinese government has committed egregious violations against Uyghur and other Turkic communities in Xinjiang/The Uyghur Region, which a report of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in August 2022 stated “may constitute international crimes, in particular crimes against humanity.” Beijing has also intensified its repression in Tibet, while in Hong Kong the creation of a new national security architecture at Beijing’s behest has severely restricted the rights and freedoms long enjoyed by Hong Kong’s people.

Beijing’s foreign policy has also been increasingly detrimental to human rights, both in the region and beyond. The Chinese government continues to support highly abusive governments, to challenge international efforts to secure accountability for grave abuses, and to intensify efforts to undermine the international human rights system and rewrite its norms. The Chinese government has also engaged in increasingly brazen transnational repression – abuses committed outside its borders – including in EU countries.

The EU has already suspended human rights dialogues with highly repressive countries such as Russia, Syria, Belarus, and Myanmar, among others, in light of the nature, scale and pervasiveness of their authorities’ human rights abuses and violations of international law. The Chinese government has committed serious crimes amounting to crimes against humanity. It has long been evident that the human rights dialogue is not an appropriate nor an effective tool to address them. There is no reason to expect the 39th round will prove more beneficial to the rights of people in China than the previous 38. The EU and its member states should pursue different, more effective actions to press the Chinese government to end its crimes against humanity and other serious violations – and to hold accountable those responsible for failing to do so.

We have long been suggesting alternative action, latest in this February 2023 letter. We stand ready to discuss these and other options with you any time.

Signatories:
Amnesty International
Front Line Defenders
Human Rights Watch
International Service for Human Rights
World Uyghur Congress

https://www.frontlinedefenders.org/en/statement-report/joint-public-civil-society-letter-eu-china-human-rights-dialogue-2024

and see https://www.ucanews.com/news/jailing-of-chinese-metoo-journalist-upsets-rights-groups/105431

https://www.aol.com/news/eu-urges-china-stop-human-145953152.html

https://www.reuters.com/world/china/eu-urges-china-stop-human-rights-crackdown-2024-06-17/

Columbia University’s Human Rights Advocates Program

June 17, 2024

Founded in 1989, the Human Rights Advocates Program (HRAP) is a model of human rights capacity building. HRAP capitalizes on its affiliation with Columbia University and its location in New York City to provide grassroots leaders the tools, knowledge, access, and networks to strengthen their organizations and promote human rights.

HRAP’s comprehensive program of advocacy, networking, skills-building, and academic coursework provides advocates the opportunity to hone practical skills, develop a deeper understanding of human rights, and foster mutually beneficial relationships with organizations and individuals in their fields.

hrap_lespinasse.jpg

Before I came to HRAP, I knew that people were suffering in Bosnia and that people were dying in Sudan. But when I came to HRAP, I met Advocates from Bosnia, Sudan, and other countries – people who are living and making a difference in their countries.

See also: https://www.york.ac.uk/cahr/human-rights-defenders/past/natalia-zviagina/

https://www.york.ac.uk/cahr/human-rights-defenders/past/tewodros/

https://www.humanrightscolumbia.org/hrap

New ProtectDefenders.eu study reveals urgent need for increased funding and support for human rights defenders

June 14, 2024

In the study The Landscape of Public International Funding for Human Rights Defenders, released on 12 June 2024, ProtectDefenders.eu sheds light on the critical challenges faced by human rights defenders (HRDs) worldwide, specifically focusing on their financing by public actors.

The research, which combines an analysis of financial data over a period of four years with interviews, investigations, and input from defenders, underscores the pressing need for greater financial support and resources to safeguard the invaluable work of human rights defenders in promoting and protecting human rights globally.

The ProtectDefenders.eu study reveals and documents a concerning trend: while the need for support for HRDs has never been greater, funding levels have stagnated, with only marginal increases observed over the examined period. Despite rhetoric emphasising the importance of prioritising human rights prioritisation, the actual allocation of resources has failed to keep pace with the deteriorating global situation, representing a mere 0.11% of total Official Development Assistance (ODA) annually.

Key findings from the study include:

  • Disparity in funding: While some donors have demonstrated a strong commitment to supporting HRDs, others have allocated minimal resources, with wide variations observed among donor contributions. This disparity is also evident among different groups of defenders and thematic areas, as well as in funding dynamics by region, with a concerning decrease in attention to the MENA region
  • Challenges in accessing funds: HRDs continue to face obstacles in accessing international funds, including restrictive funding requirements and bureaucratic hurdles
  • Need for core funding: There is a critical need for core, flexible, and sustainable funding to enable HRDs to effectively carry out their vital work
  • Lack in localisation efforts: The study emphasises the importance of localising HRD protection programs and ensuring that funding reaches grassroots organisations and movements.

This research underscores the urgent need for action to better support human rights defenders and is a call to action for donors, policymakers, and stakeholders to stand in solidarity with human rights defenders,” said Gerald Staberock, Chair of the Board of ProtectDefenders.eu and Secretary-General of the World Organisation against Torture. “HRDs play a vital role in advancing human rights and democracy worldwide, yet they continue to face increasing risks and challenges. It is imperative that donors and stakeholders heed the recommendations outlined in this study to ensure that HRDs receive the support they need to carry out their crucial work.”

In response to these findings, the study presents a series of detailed recommendations aimed at addressing the funding gap and improving support for HRDs. These recommendations include increasing overall funding levels, reducing restrictions on grants, enhancing political and diplomatic support, and investing in donors’ own capacities to better understand the needs and contexts of HRDs.

ProtectDefenders.eu issues a clear call to all donors and public actors to urgently address this situation. Specifically, the demands include:

  1. Increase in public funding: Advocating for an increase in public funding for HRDs from 0.11% to 0.5% for the period 2025-2028.
  2. Building trust through core grants: Urging for more core grants with reduced restrictions, audits, lower result expectations, and extended support horizons.
  3. Directing more grants locally: Advocating for a higher proportion of grants to be allocated to local NGOs to ensure funding reaches grassroots organizations and movements.
  4. Establishment of HRD principles for regranting: Calling upon the community of donors and financiers of HRD work to establish HRD Principles for Regranting, outlining guidelines for more effective and equitable distribution of funds.

The full report, along with its recommendations, can be accessed here.

https://protectdefenders.eu/projects/research-institutional-funding-human-rights-defenders/

https://www.omct.org/en/resources/news-releases/new-protectdefenders-eu-study-reveals-urgent-need-for-increased-funding-and-support-for-human-rights-defenders

Q&A: Transnational Repression

June 14, 2024

On 12 June 2024, Human Rights Watch published a useful, short “questions-and-answers” document which outlines key questions on the global trend of transnational repression. 

Illustration of a map being used to bind someone's mouth
© 2024 Brian Stauffer for Human Rights Watch
  1. What is transnational repression?
  2. What tactics are used?
  3. Is transnational repression a new phenomenon?  
  4. Where is transnational repression happening? 
  5. Do only “repressive” states commit transnational repression?
  6. Are steps being taken to recognize and address transnational repression? 
  7. What should be done? 

What is transnational repression?

The term “transnational repression” is increasingly used to refer to state actors reaching beyond their borders to suppress or stifle dissent by targeting human rights defenders, journalists, government critics and opposition activists, academics and others, in violation of their human rights. Particularly vulnerable are nationals or former nationals, members of diaspora communities and those living in exile. Many are asylum seekers or refugees in their place of exile, while others may be at risk of extradition or forced return. Back home, a person’s family members and friends may also be targeted, by way of retribution and with the aim of silencing a relative in exile or forcing their return.

Transnational repression can have far-reaching consequences, including a chilling effect on the rights to freedom of expression and association. While there is no formal legal definition, the framing of transnational repression, which encompasses a wide range of rights abuses, allows us to better understand it and propose victim-centered responses.

What tactics are used?

Documented tactics of transnational repression include killings, abductions, enforced disappearances, unlawful removals, online harassment, the use of digital surveillance including spyware, targeting of relatives, and the abuse of consular services.  Interpol’s Red Notice system has also been used as a tool of transnational repression, to facilitate unlawful extraditions. Interpol has made advances in improving its vetting systems, yet governments continue to abuse the Red Notice system by publishing unlawful notices seeking citizens who have fled abroad on spurious charges. This leaves targets vulnerable to arrest and return to their country of origin to be mistreated, even after they have fled to seek safety abroad.

Is transnational repression a new phenomenon?

No, the practice of governments violating human rights beyond their borders is not new. Civil society organizations have been documenting such abuses for decades. What is new, however, is the growing recognition of transnational repression as more than a collection of grave incidents, but also as an increasing phenomenon of global concern, requiring global responses. What is also new is the increasing access to and use of sophisticated technology to harass, threaten, surveil and track people no matter where they are. This makes the reach of transnational repression even more pervasive. 

Where is transnational repression happening? 

Transnational repression is a global phenomenon. Cases have been documented in countries and regions around the world. The use of technology such as spyware increases the reach of transnational repression, essentially turning an infected device, such as a mobile phone, into a portable surveillance tool, allowing targeted individuals to be spied on and tracked around the world. 

Do only “repressive” states commit transnational repression?

While many authoritarian states resort to repressive tactics beyond their own borders, any government that seeks to silence dissent by targeting critics abroad is committing transnational repression. Democratic governments have also contributed to cases of transnational repression, for example through the provision of spyware, collaborating with repressive governments to deny visas or facilitate returns, or relying upon flawed Interpol Red Notices that expose targeted individuals to risk.

Are steps being taken to recognize and address transnational repression? 

Increasingly, human rights organizations, UN experts and states are documenting and taking steps to address transnational repression.

For example, Freedom House has published several reports on transnational repression and maintains an online resource documenting incidents globally. Human Rights Watch has published reports, including one outlining cases of transnational repression globally and another focusing on Southeast Asia. Amnesty International has published a report on transnational repression in Europe. Many other nongovernmental organizations are increasingly producing research and reports on the issue. In her report on journalists in exile, the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression dedicated a chapter to transnational repression. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights used the term in a June 2024 statement.

Certain governments are increasingly aware of the harms posed by transnational repression. Some are passing legislation to address the problem, while others are signing joint statements or raising transnational repression in international forums. However, government responses are often piecemeal, and a more cohesive and coordinated approach is needed. 

What should be done? 

Governments should speak out and condemn all cases of transnational repression, including by their friends and allies. They should take tangible steps to address transnational repression, including by adopting rights-respecting legal frameworks and policies to address it. Governments should put victims at the forefront of their response to these forms of repression. They should be particularly mindful of the risks and fears experienced by refugee and asylum communities. They should investigate and appropriately prosecute those responsible. Interpol should continue to improve vetting process by subjecting governments with a poor human rights record to more scrutiny when they submit Red Notices. Interpol should be transparent on which governments are continually abusing the Red Notice system, and limit their access to the database.  

At the international level, more can be done to integrate transnational repression within existing human rights reporting, and to mandate dedicated reporting on cases of transnational repression, trends, and steps needed to address it.

see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2024/03/19/transnational-repression-human-rights-watch-and-other-reports/

https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/06/12/qa-transnational-repression

Launch of the HRD Declaration+25

June 8, 2024

Wednesday 19 June 2024 from 1:00 pm- 2:00 pm CEST there will be a HRC56 Side Event for the launch of the Declaration+25, a civil society-led authoritative document endorsed by experts that supplements the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders and sets standards to protect them.

Palais des Nations Room XXV Geneva. This in-person event will be moderated by ISHR on behalf of a Secretariat of 18 organisations, and include a panel of exceptional human rights defenders.

FIFA must secure binding human rights safeguards from 2030 and 2034 World Cup hosts

June 8, 2024

In a new report of 6 June 2024, the Amnesty International insists the world governing body “must terminate any agreement to host the tournament if human rights are jeopardised or violated“.

Last year Fifa confirmed Spain, Portugal and Morocco will be co-hosts in 2030, with the opening three matches taking place in Uruguay, Argentina and Paraguay. Saudi Arabia is the sole bidder for the 2034 tournament. Amnesty says the Gulf kingdom has an “appalling human rights record and its bid carries a broad range of very serious risks”.

But it also warns the 2030 tournament “carries human rights risks primarily related to labour rights, discrimination, freedom of expression and assembly, policing, privacy and housing”. It adds that greenhouse gas emissions generated by travel related to the expanded 48-team tournament across three continents “are likely to be significant, despite Fifa’s stated commitment on climate change to halve carbon emissions by 2030 and be ‘net-zero’ by 2040”.

Amnesty claims Fifa has not responded to its requests to speak to consultants involved in human rights-based assessments of the bids.

Fifa has been approached for comment. It is set to formally confirm the hosts of the two tournaments later this year at a meeting of its congress. When unveiling its choices for hosting the World Cups, it said it was “fully committed” to ensuring the competitions were held to “sustainable event management standards and practices, safeguarding principles for the protection of children and adults at risk and to respecting internationally-recognised human rights in accordance with the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights”.

It has also said it will “conduct a targeted dialogue with bidders, to ensure complete, comprehensive bids are received and evaluated against the minimum hosting requirements….[It] will focus on the defined priority areas of the event vision and key metrics, infrastructure, services, commercial, and sustainability and human rights.”

Steve Cockburn, Amnesty’s Head of Labour Rights and Sports, said: “With only a single bid to host each tournament and major human rights concerns surrounding both, there are huge questions about Fifa’s willingness to stand by the pledges and reforms it has made in recent years, including exercising its right to reject any bid which does not meet its stated human rights requirements.

“History shows that the World Cup can be a source of dignity or exploitation, inclusion or discrimination, freedom or repression, making Fifa’s award of the hosting rights for the 2030 and 2034 tournaments among the most consequential decisions ever taken by a sporting organisation.”

Assessing the human rights risks related to the respective bids, Amnesty claims that in Spain, Morocco and Portugal “migrant workers are at risk of exploitation”, “excessive use of police forces is a proven risk” and “racial discrimination is an issue in all three countries”. It says an independent Fifa evaluation of Morocco’s previous bid – to host the 2026 World Cup – “noted its criminalisation of same-sex acts was particularly problematic” and that the country “restricts freedom of expression”.

Amnesty says Saudi Arabia has invested in sport “to distract from its abysmal track record of abuses”, and that the building programme required for the 2034 tournament is “heightening risks surrounding forced evictions [and] serious risk of labour abuses”. [see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2023/01/10/sports-washing-autocracies-can-afford-more-big-events/]

It adds that “discrimination is deeply embedded in legislation and practices, and could impact fans, workers, players and journalists… women fans face the risk of unfair and disproportionate prosecution… and there have been sweeping arrests and imprisonment of journalists, human rights defenders, political activists.” Amnesty says reforms to prevent human rights violations related to the World Cup in Saudi Arabia would need “sweeping changes to labour laws to protect workers, and the release of activists and human rights defenders who’ve been unjustly imprisoned”.

Last year the Saudi Sports Minister rejected claims of ‘sportswashing’ and defended the country’s right to host the 2034 tournament, telling the BBC: “We’ve hosted more than 85 global events and we’ve delivered on the highest level. We want to attract the world through sports. Hopefully, by 2034, people will have an extraordinary World Cup.”

https://www.amnesty.org.uk/press-releases/fifa-must-secure-binding-human-rights-safeguards-2030-and-2034-world-cup-hosts-new

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/articles/ckrrylej30zo

Obituary of Leah Levin: 1926 – 2024

June 7, 2024

I am not a professional obituary writer, but I surely wished I were, as writing about my dear friend Leah Levin deserves the best possible skills. Fortunately, I received some excellent input from her caring family of which I am making good use. A celebration of Leah’s life will be held by the family on 13 June, 4 pm BST which can also be followed online.

For those of you who wish to attend via zoom, here is the link:
https://ted-conf.zoom.us/j/91594050908?pwd=cE9SaHB4S0JkSW5MWFEwUTdOWmJIZz09

And you can leave messages at: : https://www.mykeeper.com/profile/LeahLevin/ 

Leah Levin, was a well-known figure in the international human rights movement of the 1970’s and onwards. She died of cardiac arrest on 25 May, 2024, at the formidable age of 98. For over half a century, she served and led a range of human rights organisations and collaborated globally with some of the world’s leading activists. For which she received an honorary doctorate from the University of Essex in 1992 and an OBE in 2001.

She was the author of UNESCO’s “Human Rights: Questions and Answers”, one of the world’s most widely disseminated books on human rights, (translated into more than 30 languages).

From 1982-1992, she was director of JUSTICE, a pioneering organisation that sought to right miscarriages of justice and which was a national section of the International Commission of Jurists . She served as a board member or trustee of the United Nations Association, the Anti-Slavery Society, International Alert, Redress, Readers International and The International Journal of Human Rights. But most of all, I remember her from the work she did to make sure that we would not forget one of our most impressive friends: Martin Ennals, who had led Amnesty from 1968 to 1980 and had been one of her closest friends until his death in 1981. [see his biography in the Encyclopedia of Human Rights, OUP, 2009, Vol 2, pp 135-138].

Leah’s contribution to the creation and development of the Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders was enormous. She stepped down from the board after two decades in 2013.[see: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2013/10/07/leah-levin-a-human-rights-defender-of-the-first-rank/].

Frances D’Souza, said about Leah: “without any pretension she was nearly always right. She hit the nail on the head whether dealing with world affairs or people. She made a significant difference by her wise counsel and fact that she could really see what the issues were, read the situation and do something about it.”

Leah Levin had the special talent to draw other like-minded people to her and help coalesce a community of activists with whom she would collaborate throughout her entire life.

Her own life story is one of human rights struggle: Leah was born Sarah Leah Kacev on 1 April 1926 in Lithuania. She grew up as Leah Katzeff in Piketberg, South Africa, a small, rural town in Western Cape to where the family had to flee to escape poverty and anti-Semitism in the difficult years after the First World War and Russian revolution. Leah was the first of four children and the first person in her family to go to university. She graduated in 1945, when at the end of the second world war, the Katzeffs found out that their family along with their entire Jewish community in Mazeikiai, had been murdered by local Lithuanians organized by the Germans in the very first days of the Nazi advance in 1941.

In 1947 she married Archie Levin, fifteen years her senior. Like Leah, Archie was the child of European Jewish immigrants. Together they set up a new business, writing travel guides to Central and Southern Africa. In 1960, disgusted by the repression of anti-apartheid protest, the couple moved to the British colony of Southern Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) with their two children Michal and Jeremy. A third son, David, was born in Salisbury (now Harare).  

In Rhodesia, Leah completed a second degree in international relations at the University of Rhodesia and Nyasaland, while her husband became politically active. His activities angered those in power; shortly before Rhodesia unilaterally declared independence. Archie was tipped off that he was likely to be arrested. He rapidly left for the UK with his daughter Michal and later was joined by his son Jeremy; a few months later, Leah and her infant son David joined the rest of the family in the UK. 

In London, Leah found a volunteer post as Secretary of the newly founded United Nations Association. The UNA human rights committee brought together people who became lifelong friends as well as colleagues: Martin Ennals, Sir Nigel Rodney, Amnesty’s first legal officer and later UN rapporteur on torture, and Kevin Boyle, who ran the Human Rights Centre of the University of Essex.  After the death in 1977 of her husband Archie, Leah threw herself still more wholeheartedly into human rights work.  In 1978, she took a job as Secretary of the Anti-Slavery Society, which connected her to the United Nations in Geneva. And in 1982 she moved to run JUSTICE for a decade. In 1992, she co-founded Redress, representing victims of torture to obtain justice and reparation for them. 

Even when fully retired Leah continued to keep an active interest in children and grandchildren as well as her human rights “children”. I will bitterly miss her almost yearly phone calls to check on me to make sure I am doing the right thing.

See also: https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/laureates/ac7b872e-5b7d-409f-975b-265a59f5f160

On 21 June 2024 the Times published https://www.thetimes.com/article/4a2d6b5a-a2a0-477d-8701-29a8358a6dee?shareToken=0dd6ee7a6cedbc723f18cce633713205 with emphasis on her ‘national’ role but disappointingly leaving out much of her international contribution.

and later:https://www.washingtonpost.com/obituaries/2024/06/26/leah-levin-human-rights-dies/

Election Monitors are Human Rights Defenders!

June 6, 2024

Resolution 01/2024

On 23 May 2024 the IACHR Press Office (cidh-prensa@oas.org) informed us that the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) has issued Resolution 01/2024, recognizing national and international election monitors as human rights defenders based on the intrinsic connection between respecting and protecting human rights and defending democracy.

The Commission highlights the important role of election monitors for the defense of democracy and the rule of law. Through their activities, electoral observers stand up for civil and political rights including the rights to freedom of association, assembly, expression, access to information, equality before the law, and non-discrimination, as well as for the rights to a fair trial and to judicial protection.

The activities of election monitors help to protect the rights held in Article XX of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man and in Article 23 of the American Convention on Human Rights, both of which mention the right to vote and to be elected by universal suffrage in periodic elections.

In the case of national observers, election monitoring is a form of political participation and a way of exercising political rights by looking after, defending, and fostering the principles that should prevail in election processes, including transparency, certainty, legality, fairness, and universal suffrage by secret ballot among a plurality of political options.

The actions of electoral observers ultimately seek to ensure the integrity of election processes and therefore to preserve expressions of citizens’ sovereign will, which is one of the main tenets of representative democracy according to inter-American and international instruments for the protection of human rights.

In its resolution, the Commission acknowledges the importance of electoral observation missions. The IACHR calls on States to enable suitable conditions for independent and impartial election monitoring and to ensure that election monitors can do their work freely, without retaliation of any kind, and enjoy protection from any risks they may face as a result of their efforts.

https://www.oas.org/en/iachr/jsForm/?File=/en/iachr/media_center/preleases/2024/112.asp

Taula Catalana Coordinating Group for Human Rights and Peace in Central America

June 5, 2024

Nineteen non-governmental development organizations (NGDOs) have joined to form the new Taula Catalana pels Drets Humans i la Pau a l’Amèrica Central (Catalana Coordinating Group for Human Rights and Peace in Central America). This platform aims to strengthen dialogue and Catalonia’s response to the violence and human rights crises in Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, and Nicaragua.

According to the new coordinating group, “the context of repression, persecution and political violence in the region compels us to come together to draw international attention to the situation and strengthen the many links of solidarity that already exist.”

The new platform has ICIP’s support through the “Violence in non-war settings” work area, which aims to provide tools for analysis and action in situations of direct, structural and cultural violence such as those experienced in Central America.

The Taula Catalana Coordinating Group, which is being formally constituted, will be formally launched in Barcelona on 18-19 June with the celebration of the conference “Human Rights and Peace in Central America: Challenges and Opportunities.”  This conference, jointly organized with ICIP, will take place at the Barcelona History Museum and will feature the participation of sixteen advocates for human rights and the environment from Central America with renowned academic, political, journalistic, community or social backgrounds.

Social society initiatives

Some of the topics to be addressed during the conference are the co-optation of the state by criminal networks, the unbridled exploitation of territories, social remilitarization, polarization and hate speech (LGBTIQ-phobic, sexist, racist…) as part of the infringements experienced by the population, condemned to inhuman migratory routes also as a consequence of the migratory policies of the global North.

Featured speakers who will be in Barcelona for this event include Dora María Téllez, opponent of the Ortega-Murillo regime in Nicaragua; Morena Herrera, Simone Weil 2023 award winner for her defence of women’s reproductive rights in El Salvador; Yéssica Trinidad, coordinator of the National Network of Women Human Rights Defenders of Honduras and an advocate for the rights of Afro-Indigenous communities; and the Guatemalan journalist Rolanda García, attacked and detained in 2018 when she was reporting on the illegal logging of trees on the banks of the Cahabón River (Alta Verapaz) by workers of the Oxec hydroelectric company.

This link provides all the information about the conference and the program of activities. Registration is free.

Human rights defender’s profile: Elham Kohistani, from Afghanistan

June 5, 2024

On 3 June 2024, ISHR published Human rights defender’s story: Elham Kohistani, from Afghanistan

Elham Kohistani is a human rights defender from Afghanistan. Having witnessed successive governments trample human rights in her country since her childhood, she has dedicated her life to fighting for the basic rights of women and girls.

In an interview with ISHR, Elham spoke about her hopes for the future of Afghanistan, urging the international community to continue supporting human rights defenders in the long term to achieve peace and prosperity.

Stand in solidarity with Elham and other women human rights defenders (WHRDs) from Afghanistan: join us in our campaign to push for UN experts and States to explicitly and publicly recognise the situation in Afghanistan as a form of gender apartheid and the need for an accountability mechanism to address gross human rights violations against women.

https://ishr.ch/defender-stories/human-rights-defenders-story-elham-kohistani-from-afghanistan