Posts Tagged ‘human rights’

UN High Commissioner preparing report on reprisals agains Human Rights Defenders

May 15, 2012

On 23 March 2012 I reported on the harassment of HRDs – especially from Sri Lanka- who were in Geneva to testify at the Human Rights Council. The High Commissioners Office took a firm stand against this and the Council asked for a report on “Reprisals against persons cooperating with United Nations human rights mechanisms” to be submitted to the Council in September.

That this being taken seriously is shown by the request for information sent out to all NGOs.

Dear All,

In preparation of the Secretary-General’s forthcoming report to the Human Rights Council (September 2012) on reprisals against persons cooperating with United Nations human rights mechanisms, information is invited about cases of reprisals. Please send submissions by 15 June 2012 to reprisals@ohchr.org. The next report is expected to cover the period between June 2011 and June 2012.

Submissions should:

– fall within the scope of Human Rights Council resolution 12/2 – http://goo.gl/Ulvwo

– give attention to the necessity to preserve the security of the persons concerned; please indicate if the victim (or his/her family) has agreed to be mentioned in this report and has been informed accordingly;

 – indicate if the alleged reprisal has been referred to in any UN documents (provide citations);

– in addition, follow-up information (e.g. any developments, whether additional reprisals took place, whether measures were taken by the State to investigate, etc.) is invited on the cases included in the 2011 report. Cases in 2011 referred to Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, China, India, Kenya, Malawi, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka and Sudan.
 

Get the 2011 report –  http://goo.gl/LDg9p (Deadline 15 June 2012)

Please share widely.
 
***
 
Background:
 At its 12th session, the Human Rights Council adopted a resolution on “Cooperation with the United Nations, its representatives and mechanisms in the field of human rights”. The resolution invites the Secretary-General to annually submit a report to the Council, containing a compilation and analysis on alleged reprisals against persons cooperating with UN human rights mechanisms (see para. 1 of the resolution), as well as recommendations on how to address the issues of intimidation and reprisals. In addition to cases of reprisals regarding cooperation with the Human Rights Council, Special Rapporteurs and Treaty Bodies, the report can also include cases of reprisals due to cooperation with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, its field presences and human rights advisers, United Nations Country Teams, the human rights components of peacekeeping missions, etc.

Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/unitednationshumanrights

Twitter – http://twitter.com/UNrightswire

YouTube –  http://www.youtube.com/UNOHCHR

17 May wil be again International Day Against Homophobia; UN High Commissioner takes the lead

May 12, 2012

On the occasion of the International Day against Homophobia, 17 May, watch a video message from the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, who has shown consistently that she is concerned with human rights of all and not afraid to speak out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-_kzl-_mrg (subtitled in English, French, Spanish and Arabic. click on the “CC” button at the bottom of the YouTube viewer)

Related articles

Exemplary piece on how complex human rights mechanisms relate to a country situation: in this case Malaysia

May 10, 2012

Under the somewhat narrow title: “Allow UN Special Rapporteur to probe Bersih 3.0” Ms Khoo Ying Hooi, a staff member at University Malaya, published on 10 May 2012 an excellent piece bringing together the variety of existing UN human rights mechanisms and Malaysia’ s reluctance to really embrace them. She compares the political commitments made by her country when seeking a seat on the Human Rights Council with the willingness of the Government to receive UN Rapporteurs and to implement the recommendations of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR). It is a rather long and detailed piece but worth reading in full. It was published in http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/197526.

Some of the most relevant parts to whet your appetite:

The Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression, Frank William La Rue, wanted to investigate the Bersih 3.0 rally that took place on April 28. The Malaysian Foreign Affairs Minister, Anifah Aman, is quoted as saying: “We are a sovereign nation.…….. I do not see the necessity for any outside organisation to determine whether we are free or fair.”

Ms Khoo Ying Hooi then recalls that in declaring its intention for its candidature for the HRC, the Malaysian government circulated a memorandum dated March 9, 2010, outlining its human rights record and its pledges and voluntary commitments, including “deepening and widening our cooperation with and support for the work of various UN actors and mechanisms involved in the promotion and protection of human rights such as the … Special Procedures of the HRC”. However, she continues, the way Anifah Aman described the Special Rapporteur and the HRC, as the “outsider” and the “outside organisation” is detrimental to the country.

It doesn’t reflect the commitment that the government has promised to the HRC and it is obviously just another diplomatic exercise.

The author then gives a clear explanation of the general system of the Special Procedures and summarizes with relevant detail the disappointing results of the 1998 visit to Malaysia by the (former) Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression, Abid Hussain.

She also describes the Malaysian Government’s commitment at the international level through the UPR mechanism and contrasts them with the reluctance to receive Special Rapporteurs. She ends with the strong but polite conclusion that:
”Despite the obligation on government to protect and promote the human rights, Malaysia continues to brush these concerns aside. It is indeed contradictory for Anifah Aman to come up with such a response on the offer made by La Rue.

The Foreign Affairs Minister should have been more sensitive and aware of the promises made by the government in the international level particularly in view of the next UPR review in 2013.”

Let us see whether next year the UN and NGOs can make good use of the ammunition here provided.

European Parliament calls – again – for more attention for Human Rights Defenders

May 2, 2012

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.

The official emblem of the European Parliament.

The official emblem of the European Parliament. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

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;

 full text: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&reference=P7-TA-2012-0126&language=EN&ring=A7-2012-0086

Breaking news: the Bahrain Centre for Human Rights – MEA 2012 nominee

April 24, 2012

Today the nominees of the Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders 2012 are announced in Geneva. The ann0uncement was made by the new Chair of the Martin Ennals Foundation, Mrs Micheline Calmy Rey, until last year the President of and Minister of Foreign Affairs of Switzerland.  Each nominee deserves its own post!  One of the 3 nominees is the Bahrain Center for Human Rights (BCHR).

BCHR is a nongovernmental organization that conducts research, documents human rights abuses, provides information to international NGOs and the diplomatic community in Bahrain and advocates locally and internationally.  Several of its leaders have been arrested wihout cause. BCHR has continued its human rights activities despite a hostile environment, in particular the numerous threats issued by the Government, warning that further ‘legal’ action will be taken against the members should they continue their activities.  Through its website (www.bahrainrights.org) BCHR struggles to promote democracy and human rights in accordance with international norms, encourages and supports individuals and groups to be proactive in the protection of their own and others’ rights. BCHR has emerged as a model NGO in the region on how to continue to operate and leverage national and international advocacy despite a repressive national context. It is only the second time in the 20-year history of the MEA that an organisation is one of the nominees.

Breaking news: Nasrin Sotoudeh from Iran – MEA 2012 nominee

April 24, 2012

Today the nominees of the Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders 2012 are announced in Geneva. The ann0uncement was made by the new Chair of the Martin Ennals Foundation, Mrs Micheline Calmy Rey, until last year the President of and Minister of Foreign Affairs of Switzerland.  Each nominee deserves its own post!  One of the 3 nominees is Nasrin Sotoudeh from Iran.

Nasrin Sotoudeh is a human rights lawyer and a member of the now closed Defenders of Human Rights Centre (DHRC); she was imprisoned for “spreading propaganda against the State”, “collusion and gathering with the aim of acting against national security” and “membership in an illegal organisation”. She worked for Shirin Ebadi‘s law firm, and represented imprisoned opposition activists following the June 2009 presidential elections. In this regard, she represented Shirin Ebadi after she left Iran and her assets were confiscated. On September 4, 2010, Nasrin Sotoudeh was arrested, and later sentenced to 6-year of prison and a 10-year ban on practising as lawyer. She remains detained in Evin prison and on several occasions subjected to solitary confinement. Unlike fur common criminals her family visits and furlongs are limited. Despite real danger for her security and liberty, Nasrin Sotoudeh has relentlessly defended those most vulnerable. As started by Iranian Nobel Peace Prize winner Shirin Ebadi “Ms. Sotoudeh is one of the last remaining courageous human rights lawyers who has accepted all risks for defending the victims of human rights violations in Iran”. After Akbar Ganji (2006) and Baghi (2009) this is the third human rights defender from Iran chosen by the Jury in the last seven years. The Government will surely portray this as a bias, but the rest of the world will understand that Iran is one of the worst when it comes to respect HRDs.

Upon handing over the Martin Ennals Foundation to Mrs Micheline Calmy Rey

April 24, 2012

Deutsch: Schweizer Bundesrätin de:Micheline Ca...

It took almost 20 years but I finally have been able to step down as Chair of the Martin Ennals Foundation. Yesterday the Board accepted my resignation and selected Micheline Calmy Rey as my successor (now that is upgrading!). In an hour from now she will be announced as such at the press conference in Geneva which is being streamed on http://www.martinennalsaward.org.

My departure has been carefully crafted since November last year but we have been most fortunate that in the meantime Micheline Calmy Rey left her government position and accepted the challenge to lead the MEA to its destiny as the most influential human rights award in the world. I realize that this is not a modest thing to say but I think that facts speak for themselves:

The MEA has a Jury composed of the world’s leading international human rights organisations, a unique cooperation among sometimes competing NGOs. The Laureates over the last twenty years have been outstanding examples and have all claimed that the recognition of the award has helped them in continuing their work.

The growth of the impact of the award has a lot to do, not only with its longevity, but also with the joining of forces by other entities, in the first place the City of Geneva which is now the main organiser of the ceremony at Victoria Hall.

I am sure that the foundation will be able to pursue the increased use of multimedia techniques for protecting the HRDs.  As this is often a question of resources, I will continue to advise the MEA in particular with regard to fundraising and publicity.

So, I am not really retiring; there are simply too many Human Rights Defenders out there who need support. This year’s nominees, who will be introduced to you in a few hours, illustrate the need for international recognition and protection.

Geneva, 24 April 2012

Announcement of nominees MEA 2012 streamed on internet: 24 April

April 21, 2012

The announcement of the three nominees of the Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders 2012 will take place on Tuesday 24 April 2012, from 11h00 to 11h30 in Geneva (that is 09h00 – 09h30 GMT). For the first time this short event is being ‘broadcast’ live on the internet (www.martinennalsaward.org). There will be brief film images shown of the 3 nominees. The event also includes the announcement of the new Chairperson of  the Martin Ennals Foundation.

New UN rapporteur for truth, justice and reparation important for HRDs

April 6, 2012

The Mail & Guardian Online carried an interesting piece that may have gone unnoticed. It is about the appointment of the first ever Rapporteur ‘on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence’. On March 23, the United Nations Human Rights Council appointed Pablo de Greiff, a Colombian national, who is currently the New York-based director of research at the International Centre for Transitional Justice. His tenure as special rapporteur begins on May 1.

The article refers to a recent meeting entitled “African Perspectives on the Appointment and Mandate of the UN Special Rapporteur on the Promotion of Truth, Justice, Reparation and Guarantees of Non-Recurrence”, of which a comprehensive report is forthcoming.

The article also gives a useful background to the what “Special procedures” are and underlines rightly that civil society (i.e. HRDs) should play a vital role in relation to the special rapporteur. Feeding the special rapporteur with succinct, reliable and accurate information on urgent matters relating to the mandate is one important function civil society can take on. Raising awareness about the special rapporteur and the relevant mandate as well as how it translates into reality is equally important in order to ensure increased participation in the broader process.

UN appoints rapporteur for justice – Opinion – Mail & Guardian Online.

Turkmenistan and the UN: a rare comprehensive review of human rights shortcomings

April 3, 2012
On 30 March Human Rights Watch (HRW)  together with the International Partnership for Human Rights, and Turkmen Initiative for Human Rights made public a report that on the result of the Turkmen government’s hearing at the UN Human Rights Committee. Both the hearing and the original NGO submission  show its abysmal human rights record.  “The UN review leaves no doubt about the urgent need for human rights reform in Turkmenistan. What’s key now is to make sure the Turkmen government does what it takes to rectify abuses” stated Veronika Szente Goldston, Europe and Central Asia advocacy director at Human Rights Watch.  Given Turkmenistan’s exceptionally poor record of cooperation with the UN’s human rights bodies, sustained external pressure is essential to enforce compliance, the organizations said.
The Turkmen government’s clampdown on freedom of expression and repression of civil society activism, torture and ill-treatment in places of detention, and the lack of an independent judiciary topped the committee’s concerns. It directed the Turkmen government to report back within one year on measures taken to address them. The committee also highlighted other important areas of concern, such as: Incommunicado detention and imprisonment and restrictions on “the exit and entry into [the country] by certain individuals.  Other concerns raised by the committee include: The Law on Public Associations, which “severely restricts freedom of association; reports of the use of child labor in cotton harvesting; criminalization of homosexuality; and the “alleged use of a forced assimilation policy of ‘Turkmenisation,’ for ethnic minorities.
For the full report go to: http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/03/30/turkmenistan-damning-un-report-shows-need-urgent-action
RELATED MATERIALS: