Via AllAfrica.com I came across a lengthy Opinion piece in the Herald of 11 April 2013 which is basically a rant against human rights in general and human rights defenders in general. Normally I would not want to pay much attention to these outdated views but in all fairness this blog on human rights defenders should also give space to those who are diametrically and fundamentally opposed to human rights.
That the authors write from a nationalistic perspective is clear, not only from the language used and the names mentioned but also from the reference to HRD Beatrice Tele Khalalempi Mnzebele (“a shameless white apologist”) as a foreigner from…. Swaziland. Race is a constant element in the piece by equating ‘western’ and ‘white’. The rest of the terminology is reminiscent of the cold war days (‘neo-liberal prophets of democracy “), cultural relativism (“As Africans, we believe that it is the community that protects and nurtures the individual“) and slogans (“human rights are merely an instrument of Western political neo-colonialism and imperialism“). One of the most striking features is the almost total absence of alternative value systems. The closest the authors come to it is when they state: “It is therefore our argument that the value of human rights should be re-examined by affirming the differences between human beings, in acknowledging that we are all influenced by a myriad of different factors, such as our social, political, and cultural backgrounds. Human rights should be established based on the uniqueness of each and every human being, rather than on myopic neo-liberal assumptions propounded by Beatrice and her Western friends.” It contains a ringing endorsement of the uniqueness of each human being – so dear to the neo liberals – but no much more that could constitute a different overarching system. Not a word about the African Charter, about misled (?) countries such as South Africa or Ghana. Instead the opposition to Mugabe is described as: “thugs and all sorts of assorted MDC-T delinquents”.
But for those who want to read the whole piece here is the link the opinion written by Bowden MbanjeandDarlington Mahuku, who – believe it or not – are lecturers in international relations, and peace and governance with Bindura University of Science Education.
The Ugandan Observer reported that the NGO Foundation for Human Rights Initiative (FHRI) has been the target of break-ins three times in five years at their Nsambya office. According to Livingstone Sewanyana, the executive director of FHRI, such break-ins and robberies don’t only demoralise them, but also have become a threat to the work and confidentiality of their documents in particular. “We don’t feel at ease when such events happen,” he says, “we have lost a lot of data and that’s a big threat to our work.” FHRI is not the only human rights defenders HRD organisation that has been broken into by unknown persons, taking documents and computers. Last December, the office of the Sexual Minorities of Uganda SMUG was broken into, with a lot of equipment stolen. A report assessing the environment in which human rights defenders operated last year, shows that actually, a host of civil society organisations were broken into – a fact seen as a way of crippling their operations in the country. “HRDs, especially within the civil society, who draw attention to human rights violations sometimes have become visible targets susceptible to reprisals,” notes the recently-released Human Rights Defenders in Uganda report: “The Quest for A Better Working Environment, Vol II, 2012” (by the Human Rights Centre Uganda).
These cases are reported to police but according to Sewanyana, there has not been much help.“We have reported all these to police. We have written statements but not a single suspect has been arrested,” Ssewanyana told The Observer. However, Kampala Metropolitan Police Spokesperson Ibin Ssenkumbi says they have to follow due procedure. “Police is doing its work and when the investigations are done, the perpetrators will be brought to book,” he says.
The Human Rights Foundation calls on Venezuelan authorities to dismiss the case against Miguel Hernández, a Venezuelan auto mechanic who has been prosecuted since 2010, for wearing a t-shirt featuring Bart Simpson with the phrase “Hugo: I shit on your revolution” at a baseball game. The Human Rights Foundation published a full legal report on his case, which concludes that Venezuela breached Article 13 of the American Convention on Human Rights. Hernández’s case is the final case documented in the NGO’s ‘Caracas Nine campaign’ (www.CaracasNine.com). The report concludes that Hernández was arrested and charged by Venezuelan authorities for the alleged crime of “offending the heads of government,” solely for exercising his right to freedom of expression. More than three years later, Hernández remains subject to criminal prosecution that could result in a prison sentence of up to two and a half years. Since February 2010, Hernández has been required to appear monthly in court as a pre-trial measure alternative to imprisonment.
Proceedings in this case, brought by a fruit processing company before the South Bangkok criminal court, are scheduled for today April 11, 2013. The charges stem from a defamation complaint filed on February 14 by the Natural Fruit Company Limited against Andy Hall for an investigative report about serious labor rights violations at the company’s factory in Prachaub Kirikhan province. If convicted, Hall faces up to two years in prison. He is also facing civil damages of 300 million baht (US$10 million).“Criminal charges against Andy Hall reflect an attempt to stifle serious reporting on alleged abuses by one of Thailand’s top fruit processors,” said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “Freedom to investigate abuses by corporations is critical to ensure compliance and accountability under Thai law and human rights standards.” The Natural Fruit Company, using a workforce comprised primarily of migrant workers from Burma, asserted that Hall defamed and damaged the company by “broadcasting false statements to public media.”
Hall’s report, “Cheap has a high price: Responsibility problems relating to international private label products and food production in Thailand,” researched and written with the Finnish nongovernmental organization FinnWatch, investigated the production practices of private label juices and fruit sold in Finland, including by Natural Fruit Company Limited. The report alleged that Natural Fruit Company Limited had committed serious labor rights abuses, including poor working conditions, unlawfully low wages, confiscation of workers’ official documents, use of child labor, and excessive overtime. Human Rights Watch, along with an increasing number of states and international authorities, believes that criminal defamation laws should be abolished, as criminal penalties are always disproportionate punishments for reputational harm and infringe on free expression. Criminal defamation laws are open to easy abuse, resulting in very harsh consequences, including imprisonment. As repeal of criminal defamation laws in an increasing number of countries shows, such laws are not necessary for the purpose of protecting reputations. “The prosecution of Andy Hall strikes at the very core of efforts by human rights defenders to end pervasive abuses of workers in Thailand’s export industry,” Adams said. “International companies sourcing from Thailand should raise concerns with the government that using criminal charges to silence rights critics could adversely affect the overall reputation of Thailand’s major export sectors. The Thai government should welcome efforts to protect worker’s rights, not penalize them.”
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.
Voluntary work in one of the world’s leading human rights organisations can provide valuable experience and is a great opportunity to contribute to the international human rights movement. The voluntary work is unpaid, although travel and lunch expenses are provided. Amnesty International can also act as a sponsor to enable you to arrange your own right to be in the UK as a volunteer. Please note that volunteering does not lead directly to employment with Amnesty International.
The volunteers will work in the ‘Individuals at Risk’ team to ensure the development and coordination of a strategic, sustainable body of casework for effective action. The volunteers will work directly with the Individuals at Risk Research and Policy Advisor, under whose supervision the volunteers will contribute to work on human rights defenders protection, with a specific focus on women human rights defenders, as well as work related to relationship management and ethics policy of human rights engagement. The deadline is 17 April.
Nataša Kandić, founder of Humanitarian Law Center in Serbia and 1999 MEA Laureate, has been awarded the 2013 “Civil Rights Defender of the Year Award” for her “persistent and fearless work on documenting war crimes and the most serious human rights abuses in the former Yugoslavia, and for supporting war crimes trials by providing courts with evidence and witnesses.” Nataša’s human rights work has put her life at risk but her concern has always been with the war crime victims and not her own persona. “Those who choose to work with human rights connected to war cannot be afraid. I have never thought about risks. I am always only thinking about uncovering the truth about the crimes that have been committed and seeking the conviction of those responsible. There is no room for fear”, she stated. Read the rest of this entry »
On 5 April 2013 Civil Rights Defenders announced a potentially life-saving gizmo which is a personal alarm to alert in the case of kidnapping of Human Rights Defenders. The slick promotional video clip above makes cleat what it intends to do. Civil Rights Defenders has dubbed it the Natalia Project (named after Natalia Estemirova, a leading, human rights defender in the North Caucasus, who was brutally kidnapped and murdered). The bracelet uses GPS and social media to inform of a kidnapping within seconds.
The bracelet uses a mobile signal to notify of an attack and issues a real-time GPS location of the victim directly Read the rest of this entry »
Under the heading “Navi Pillay: My fight for Human Rights” Matthew Bannister meets the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay. A bus driver’s daughter from a poor Indian section of Durban in South Africa, Navi grew up and began her human rights work during the apartheid era and became the first non-white woman to establish her own law practice and to be appointed as a High Court Judge in South Africa. She has become on e of the most remarkable personalities in the worldwide human rights movement.
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.
Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards 