Posts Tagged ‘international procedures’

UN Human Rights Council should strengthen impact on the ground, say NGOs

April 24, 2018

The United Nations Human Rights Council needs to be strengthened by measures to enhance its impact on the ground, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the International Service for Human Rights said in a report released on 23 April 2018. The Human Rights Council is approaching a critical juncture in 2018, as countries discuss various measures to strengthen it or make it more efficient, but ‘Efficiency’ Can’t Be Separated From Effectiveness.

The report, “Strengthening the UN Human Rights Council from the Ground Up,” outlines the discussions and key recommendations during a dialogue convened by the organizations in February. The dialogue brought together a broad range of human rights defenders working at the national, regional, and international levels with representatives of national human rights institutions, countries from various regions, and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The focus was on making concrete and implementable recommendations that do not require institutional reform.

Tawanda Mutasah, senior director of international law and policy at Amnesty International, said: “To be credible, any discussion of Council strengthening should focus primarily on enhancing its contribution to the promotion and protection of human rights – its impact on the ground. As the council’s Bureau launches discussions this year on enhancing the efficiency of the council, we reiterate that measures to strengthen the council’s efficiency should not, and cannot, be separated from efforts to enhance its effectiveness.”

Salma El Hosseiny, ISHR’s human rights council advocate, said: “It is therefore imperative that discussions on strengthening the council – and making it more efficient – be informed by the experience and expertise of national and regional level actors, including rights-holders, human rights defenders and other civil society actors, victims/survivors (and their representatives), national human rights institutions and UN country teams.”

Many participants at the February dialogue affirmed the value and relevance of the council in responding to human rights crises and in encouraging a broad range of human rights reforms and commitments by individual countries. At the same time, they shared concerns about issues that limit the council’s ability to effectively deliver on its mandate.

The Human Rights Council plays a vital role in addressing many human rights concerns, but its impact is limited and credibility eroded when it fails to address grave human rights violations for primarily political reasons. Individual countries should strengthen the council’s ability to promote and protect human rights on the ground, particularly through prevention, implementation and accountability. said John Fisher Geneva Director, Human Rights Watch

Maryam Al Khawaja, special advisor on advocacy at the Gulf Center for Human Rights and ISHR board member, said: “The selectivity and politicization of the council’s response to country situations allows some governments to escape scrutiny for serious human rights violations.”

Hassan Shire, executive director of DefendDefenders, said: “Having States that commit gross and systematic human rights violations sitting on the Council negatively impacts its credibility in the eyes of people around the world.”

Gustavo Huppes, officer for democratic space at Conectas said: “To have impact on the ground, follow-up and implementation are key, though often neglected priorities of the council”.

Yashasvi Nain, program officer at the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, said: “An effective council is one that is accessible and visible to a broad range of actors, including victims, rights-holders, civil society, and human rights defenders.”

https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/04/23/un-human-rights-council-should-strengthen-impact-ground

http://www.ishr.ch/news/hrc-council-must-be-strengthened-ground-enhance-impact

Posted in Amnesty international, books, HRW, Human Rights Council, ISHR, UN | Leave a Comment »
Tags: AI, Geneva, Gustavo Huppes, HRW, international procedures, international protection, ISHR, Maryam Al-Khawaja, NGOs, Strengthening the UN Human Rights Council from the Ground Up, UN Human Rights Council

2017 (1): Are we heading towards a ‘post human rights world’?

January 11, 2017

The start of a new year is often the occasion to make some broader analysis. So it is with the issue of human rights defenders. I have collected some of the more interesting and will report on these in the days to come.

The first is an article (30 December 2016) by Imogen Foulkes of BBC News, who asks – with more states seemingly reluctant to honour human rights treaties – whether we are “heading towards a ‘post human rights world‘?:

A man looks at one of the first documents published by the United Nations, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Image copyright THREE LIONS/GETTY IMAGES

With an increasing number of states seemingly reluctant to honour human rights treaties, is there a future for this type of international agreement? “We stand today at the threshold of a great event both in the life of the UN, and in the life of mankind.” With these words, Eleanor Roosevelt presented the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to the United Nations. It was 1948 and UN member states, determined to prevent a repeat of the horrors of World War Two, were filled with idealism and aspiration…… Mrs Roosevelt’s prophecy that the declaration would become “the international magna carta of all men everywhere” appeared to have been fulfilled.

But fast forward almost 70 years, and the ideals of the 1940s are starting to look a little threadbare. Faced with hundreds of thousands of migrants and asylum seekers at their borders, many European nations appear reluctant to honour their obligations to offer asylum. Instead, their efforts, from Hungary’s fence to the UK’s debate over accepting a few dozen juvenile Afghan asylum seekers, seem focused on keeping people out. Meanwhile across the Atlantic, president-elect Donald Trump, asked during the election campaign whether he would sanction the controversial interrogation technique known as “waterboarding”, answered ‘I’d do much worse… Don’t tell me it doesn’t work, torture works… believe me, it works.” And in Syria, or Yemen, civilians are being bombed and starved, and the doctors and hospitals trying to treat them are being attacked.

Image copyrightDREW ANGERER/GETTY IMAGES

Little wonder then, that in Geneva, home to the UN Human Rights Office, the UN Refugee Agency, and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), the guardian of the Geneva Conventions, there is talk of a “post human rights” world. “There’s no denying that we face enormous challenges: the roll-back that we see on respect for rights in western Europe, and potentially in the US as well,” says Peggy Hicks, a director at the UN Human Rights Office. Just around the corner, at the ICRC, there is proof that those challenges are real. A survey carried out this summer by the Red Cross shows a growing tolerance of torture. Thirty-six per cent of those responding believed it was acceptable to torture captured enemy fighters in order to gain information. What’s more, less than half of respondents from the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, among them the US and the UK, thought it was wrong to attack densely populated areas, knowing that civilians would be killed. More than a quarter thought that depriving civilians of food, water and medicine was an inevitable part of war.

For ICRC President Peter Maurer these are very worrying figures. “Even in war, everyone deserves to be treated humanely,” he explains. “Using torture only triggers a race to the bottom. It has a devastating impact on the victims, and it brutalises entire societies for generations.” But how many people are listening, outside the Geneva beltway? Peggy Hicks attempts an explanation as to why attitudes to human rights may be changing.

“When confronted with the evil we see in the world today, it doesn’t surprise me that those who might not have thought very deeply about this [torture] might have a visceral idea that this might be a good idea.” But across Europe and the United States, traditional opinion leaders, from politicians to UN officials, have been accused of being out of touch and elitist. Suggesting that some people just haven’t thought deeply enough about torture to understand that it is wrong, could be part of the problem. “I do think the human rights community, myself included, have had a problem with not finding language that connects with people in real dialogue,” admits Ms Hicks. “We need to do that better, I fully acknowledge that.”

What no one in Geneva seems to want to contemplate, however, is that the principles adopted in the 1940s might just not be relevant anymore. They are good, so Geneva thinking goes, just not respected enough. “We aren’t looking for an imaginary fairytale land,” insists Tammam Aloudat, a doctor with the medical charity Medecins sans Frontieres. “We are looking for the sustaining of basic guarantees of protection and assistance for people affected by conflict.” Dr Aloudat is concerned that changing attitudes, in particular towards medical staff working in war zones, will undermine those basic guarantees. He was recently asked why MSF staff do not distinguish between wounded who are civilians, and those who might be fighters, who, if treated, would simply return to the battlefield.

“This is absurd, anyone without a gun deserves to be treated… We have no moral authority to judge their intentions in the future.” Extending the analogy, he suggested that doctors or aid workers could end up being asked not to treat, or feed, children, in case they grew up to be fighters. “It’s an illegal, unethical and immoral view of the world,” he says. “Accepting torture, or deprivation, or siege, or war crimes as inevitable, or ok if they get things done faster is horrifying, and I wouldn’t want to be in a world where that’s the norm.”

And Peggy Hicks warns against hasty criticism of current human rights law, in the absence of any genuine alternatives. “When we look at the alternatives there really aren’t any,” she said. “Whatever flaws there may be in our current framework, if you don’t have something to replace it with, you better be awfully careful about trying to tear it down.”

Source: Are we heading towards a ‘post human rights world’? – BBC News

Posted in human rights | 1 Comment »
Tags: analysis, BBC News, Geneva, Imogen Foulkes, international human rights and humanitarian law, international procedures, MSF, post human rights, torture, Universal Declaration Human Rights

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights: “States may shut my Office out – but they will not shut us up”

September 14, 2016

Readers are forgiven for not remembering that in the 1980’s it was forbidden for UN officials to name and shame countries by name (with a few exceptions) and those that did usually paid a price for that (e.g. Theo van Boven in 1982 and the curtailing of terms for some High Commissioners). Now, in the span of one week the current High Commissioner for Human Rights, Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, has first named and shamed some politicians as dangerous demagogues (6 September 2016 in the Hague): Mr. Wilders. Mr. Trump, Mr. Orban, Mr. Zeman, Mr. Hofer, Mr. Fico, Madame Le Pen, and Mr. Farage. He followed this up in his opening statement at the 33rd session of the UN Human Rights Council on 13 September 2016 with a forceful attack on countries that refuses to cooperate with his Office or other UN procedures: foremost Syria but also Venezuela, Turkey, Ethiopia, Israel, North Korea, India, Pakistan, Mozambique, USA, Gambia, China, Nepal, Uzbekistan, Armenia, Dominican Republic, Belarus, Eritrea, Iran, and Burundi. The non-cooperation by those in control of areas such as Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Crimea, and Nagorno-Karabakh was also singled out.

The part that underpins the ‘legitimacy’ of his interference is of special relevance: “Under international law, wrongful “intervention” – as prohibited in Article 2(7) of the UN Charter – is by nature coercive. And it should be obvious that my Office has no coercive power. No activity that we undertake can possibly be considered constitutive of a prohibited “intervention”. …We request access so we can better work to help bring your laws and practices in line with international agreements which you, the States drafted and ratified – and to assist you to comply with recommendations which you have publicly, and often fulsomely, accepted….Are human rights exclusively a national issue? Governments have the responsibility to uphold their human rights obligations and to respect the standards. But the human rights of all people, in all countries, also require – unquestionably – our collective attention. The Vienna Declaration, adopted unanimously 23 years ago, confirmed this..”

“Human rights violations will not disappear if a government blocks access to international observers and then invests in a public relations campaign to offset any unwanted publicity. On the contrary, efforts to duck or refuse legitimate scrutiny raise an obvious question: what, precisely, are you hiding from us? I classify as refusals of access all unreasonable delays, elaborately ritualised and unreasonably prolonged negotiations, and responses to specific requests which seem to seek to fob us off with inadequate alternatives to real, fact-based assessment. Access delayed is access denied: two weeks is surely amply sufficient to secure a decision from all relevant officials. Claims that insecure conditions make it impossible to give my staff access are also less than acceptable. My staff work with great courage in some of the world’s most severely threatened communities, and will continue to do so when called upon – or at least, we could be the judge of that.

States may shut my Office out – but they will not shut us up; neither will they blind us. If access is refused, we will assume the worst, and yet do our utmost to nonetheless report as accurately as we can on serious allegations. Our remote monitoring is likely to involve witness testimony, credible third-party reports and use of satellite imagery, among other techniques. Certainly, remote monitoring is a poor substitute for in-person observation by expert analysts. It makes it more difficult to verify and confirm the competing allegations of any party – including the Government. I regret that imprecision, and encourage all States to assist us to correct it, by permitting my teams unhindered access to events on the ground when requested.“

The two texts follow below in toto; summarizing them would not do justice to the elaborate and courageous words of this High Commissioner, who seems not to be concerned about securing a second term. Moreover, the one in the Hague stands out by its eloquence!

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in human rights, Human Rights Council, Human Rights Defenders, OHCHR, UN | 7 Comments »
Tags: demagogue, international procedures, non-cooperation, non-discrimination, non-interference, Prince Zeid Raad Zeid al-Hussein, racism, Syria, the Hague, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, UN Human Rights Council, Wilders

Joseph Bikanda, Coordinator of Pan African Human Rights Defenders Network, has the floor

April 16, 2015

The Newsletter of International Service for Human Rights in Geneva gave on 2 April 2015 the floor to Joseph Bikanda, the Coordinator of the Pan African Human Rights Defenders Network (PAHRDN), a Network made up of 5 sub-regional networks of human right defenders (HRDs), including the East and Horn of Africa, the Central, the West, the Southern and the North African HRDs Networks.

Joseph first became involved in human rights as a university student. A group of students needed a voice to advocate on their behalf. Joseph became that voice. In doing so, Joseph learnt about human rights mechanisms existing at the time. ‘I found myself surrounded by the human rights world and knew that it was the right place for me. Since then I have been working in human rights in various capacities.’

Joseph stated that PAHRDN’s key focus is to strengthen the capacity and provide support to regional networks, civil society organisations and HRDs. ‘You are always stronger working together in a network, and if each element of the network is more capable and works together – you are even stronger’

‘..Regional and international human rights mechanisms support HRDs, but networks such as PAHRDN are essential to create local supporting mechanisms for HRDs’.. Joseph explains that PAHRDN has established local mechanisms to ‘fill the gap as best we can’. These mechanisms include providing emergency support, lawyers, trial observation and practical support for HRDs.

‘One of our key roles is to provide support for HRDs in emergency situations when they are being harassed, targeted or when their lives are in danger. We have also created urgent mechanisms which apply pressure to perpetrators of human rights abuses.’

Joseph commented on the essential role that HRDs played in initiating the development of the law for the protection of HRDs in Côte d’Ivoire. He shared his hope that each African country develops similar laws in the near future and, in particular, that each of those laws is effectively implemented. ‘I hope to see HRDs develop further as key actors combatting corruption and promoting transparency. Involving HRDs in decisions ensures that the views of civil society are raised and considered.’

In his discussion with ISHR, Joseph identified that his primary objectives of attending the March session of the Human Rights Council were to raise awareness of – the horrific situation in Burundi, in particular the persecution of journalists and HRDs; the continued fighting in South Sudan and the abduction of children for combat; and the concerning counter terrorism laws in Cameroon and Ethiopia, which lack differentiation between defenders and terrorists.

You can follow Joseph Bikanda on Twitter at @Bikjo.

Joseph Bikanda: Coordinator of Pan African Human Rights Defenders Network | ISHR.

Posted in human rights, Human Rights Defenders, ISHR | Leave a Comment »
Tags: Africa, african region, civil society activists, Human Rights Defenders, international procedures, International Service for Human Rights, Joseph Bikanda, legislation, networking, NGOs, regional mechanisms, The Pan African Human Rights Defenders Network

Defending the Defenders: networking in the USA

May 23, 2014

With the introduction: “Human rights defenders are people like you – people who stand up for the right of others in the face of risk. In the U.S., human rights defenders face specific threats that impact their collective ability to work and seek justice“, five NGOs based in the USA and working for human rights in the US call on other human rights defenders to register for a training course on human rights education on Wednesday 28 May 2h00 pm to 3h00 pm (EDT). Dream Defenders, Maryland Legal Aid, the US Human Rights Network [USHRN], the Center for Constitutional Rights, and the Center for Reproductive Rights come together to teach about the work of U.S.-based human rights defenders and the special protections they have under international law; and to have the opportunity to hear from fellow human rights defenders about how they have successfully used these international protections and other forms of international advocacy to protect themselves and their ability to work. Speakers:

Ejim Dike, Executive Director of the US Human Rights Network
Sunita Patel, Staff Attorney at Center for Constitutional Rights
Karla Torres, Human Rights Fellow at Center for Reproductive Rights
Ahmad Abuznaid, Legal and Policy Director at Dream Defenders
Reena Shah, Director of Human Rights Project at Maryland Legal Aid

For more information and to download the flyer in PDF: Defending the Defenders | US Human Rights Network.

Posted in human rights, Human Rights Defenders | Leave a Comment »
Tags: Centre for Constitutional Rights, Centre for Reproductive Rights, defend the defenders, Dream Defenders, Human Rights Defenders, international human rights, international procedures, Maryland Legal Aid, training course, United States, US Human Rights Network, US Human Rights Network [USHRN], USA

25th UN Human Rights Council opens with calls to protect Human Rights Defenders

March 4, 2014

(High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay at the 25th session of the Human Rights Council. UN Photo/Jean-Marc Ferré)

Yesterday, 3 March 2014, the top UN functionaries opened the 25th session of the UN Human Rights Council with calls for the protection of members of civil society who pursue justice in their countries (a long euphemism for Human Rights Defenders).

“Streets, airwaves, entire countries are buzzing with demands for economic, social and political justice,” UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay said. Setting out this agenda and acknowledging the hard work that lay ahead in ensuring that all people enjoyed equal rights, Ms. Pillay emphasized the important role of civil society in those efforts. “We need to work together to ensure that the space, voice and knowledge of civil society is nurtured in all our countries,” she stressed. Recalling reports of what she labelled “intolerable” reprisals against people who coöperate with the UN’s human rights activities, she called for more action to protect them. “The UN itself is required to protect and support those who contribute to its work, often at great personal risk,” she said.

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon added on this point that, “No one should have to risk their life for standing up and speaking out on violations of human rights and international humanitarian law.” Civil society was the representative of “We the Peoples,” as cited in the opening of the UN Charter, and that it must be able to carry out its vital work, “free of reprisals and intimidation.” In that context, the Secretary-General highlighted the “Rights Up Front” action plan that he launched last year to ensure that human rights considerations were the top priority in all UN activities. “This initiative seeks to ensure that the United Nations system leverages the full breadth of its mandates to protect people at risk,” he said. [https://thoolen.wordpress.com/2013/12/26/rights-up-front-presented-by-jan-eliason-it-is-irrefutable-that-serious-human-rights-violations-are-the-best-early-warning-of-atrocities/]

Interesting to note that while in Geneva, the Secretary-General met 4 NGOs: the International Service for Human Rights, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the International Commission of Jurists. Their discussion certainly stressed human rights defenders and the importance of protecting them from attacks.

via United Nations News Centre – UN Human Rights Council opens with calls to protect, support civil society activism.

Posted in AI, HRW, human rights, Human Rights Council, Human Rights Defenders, ICJ, ISHR, OHCHR | Leave a Comment »
Tags: AI, Ban Ki-moon, Civil society, Geneva, High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay, HRW, human rights, Human Rights Council, Human Rights Defenders, ICJ, impunity, international procedures, ISHR, Navanethem Pillay, Navi Pillay, NGOs, Protection of Human Rights Defenders, reprisals, retaliation, Rights up Front, SG, UN, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, United Nations Human Rights Council

Optional Protocol Children’s Rights comes into effect in April

January 15, 2014

Photo: ILO

With Costa Rica as the tenth country to ratify the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, children or their representatives will have the possibility to file an individual complaint as from April 2014,when the Protocol comes formally into effect, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) announcement on 14 January.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in human rights, UN | Leave a Comment »
Tags: children, complaint procedure, Convention on the Rights of the Child, Costa Rica, Individual and group rights, international procedures, Optional Protocol, Optional Protocol 3 to Convention on the Rights of the Child, ratification, rights of children, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, treaty bodies, UN

Criteria to ensure quality successor as Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders

September 28, 2013

As this is a weekend post I have chosen one that requires a bit of reflection: Several UN Rapporteurs are coming to the end of their term in 2014, including – unfortunately – also the mandate of the Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders Margaret Sekaggya. A number of NGOs – in this case Amnesty International and the International Service for Human Rights – have given thought to the kind of kind of criteria that should ensure that a good successor in chosen, or at least that high-quality and independent candidates to come forward for nomination.

What follows are the key parts of the “Proposed criteria for selection & appointment of a new mandate holder on the situation of human rights defenders: Amnesty International, International Service for Human Rights and others; joint written statement to the 24th session of the UN Human Rights Council (9 – 27 September 2013)”

 In March 2014, the President of the UN Human Rights Council (the Council) will appoint a new Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders.

 This UN expert on the situation of human rights defenders will serve two terms of three years each.

Candidates and nominating entities shall submit an application with personal data and a motivation letter no longer than 600 words. OHCHR will prepare a public list of candidates.

 Applications open in early September, and the deadline now set for 31 October 2013.

Background

The signatory organisations call on Governments, NGOs and others, including relevant professional networks, to use this checklist to identify eligible candidates for the upcoming vacancy for the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders. We urge Governments to consult civil society and to disseminate the vacancy widely, eg. through media advertisement, so as to encourage candidates to apply for this vacancy. Prospective mandate holders should be aware that this is a voluntary, unpaid role. They would not receive salary or other financial compensation, except for travel expenses and daily subsistence allowance of ‘experts on mission’. It will require a substantial time commitment from the individual, including readiness to travel and respond to urgent situations, as explained in the checklist.

Checklist for selection of candidates for mandate of Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders:

FORMAL CRITERIA

According to Human Rights Council resolution 5/1, Annex, the following general criteria will be of paramount importance while nominating, selecting and appointing mandate-holders: (a) Expertise; (b) Experience in the field of the mandate; (c) Independence; (d) Impartiality; (e) Personal integrity; (f) Objectivity. Due consideration should be given to gender balance and equitable geographic representation, and to an appropriate representation of different legal systems. Eligible candidates should be highly qualified individuals who possess established competence, relevant expertise and extensive professional experience in the field of human rights (paras. 39-41).

INDEPENDENCE

According to Council Resolution 5/1, ‘individuals holding decision-making positions in Government or in any other organization or entity which may give rise to a conflict of interest with the responsibilities inherent to the mandate shall be excluded.’ At a minimum, this requires independence of prospective mandate holders from the executive of governments or from intergovernmental organisations, which may be the subject of a communication or mission within the terms of the mandate. The conflict of interest provision has also been interpreted to mean that candidates are expected to clarify how, if appointed, they would deal with any perceived or actual conflict of interest in relation to governments, inter-governmental organisations, or non-governmental organisations.

QUALIFICATIONS & EXPERTISE

In its Decision 6/102 of 27 September 2007, the Council approved technical and objective requirements for candidates eligible for special procedures mandates. The following checklist is intended as an interpretive aid for those requirements:

1. Qualifications (and skills): relevant educational qualifications or equivalent professional experience in the field of human rights.

[Checklist: A post-graduate university degree or equivalent in law, social sciences or in a discipline directly related to the mandate, preferably with a focus on international human rights law, would be highly desirable; Academic publications or other published material (articles, studies, reports, research papers or any similar written material demonstrating in-depth knowledge) addressing issues relevant to the mandate, from a human rights perspective; Excellent oral and written communication skills in at least one of the UN working languages (English, French and Spanish – knowledge of other widely-used or official UN languages, such as Arabic, Chinese or Russian, would be an asset);  Extensive experience in public speaking (for example in expert seminars) and in communicating at senior levels with governments, UN officials, the business community, the media and other relevant stakeholders.]

2. Relevant expertise: knowledge of international human rights instruments and standards; knowledge of institutional mandates related to the United Nations or other international or regional organisations’ work in the area of human rights; proven work experience in the field of human rights.

[Checklist: Extensive knowledge of international human rights law and standards; Several years of progressively responsible work experience in the field of human rights or as a human rights defender, including in human rights research, monitoring, reporting, investigating and advocacy; Excellent knowledge of the international and regional legal frameworks and case law relevant to the promotion and protection of the rights of human rights defenders, including on freedom of expression, freedom of peaceful assembly and association, torture, extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, and enforced or involuntary disappearances; Excellent knowledge of institutional mandates of the United Nations or other international or regional organisations in the area of human rights.]

3. Established competence: nationally, regionally or internationally recognised competence related to human rights.

[Checklist: A demonstrated commitment to universal human rights law, standards and values; Excellent knowledge and expertise of the work of human rights defenders, and the recent trends, developments and challenges they face; Experience at national, regional and/or international level in developing legislation and policy for the protection of human rights defenders and in creating an enabling environment for their work; Extensive experience with and proven commitment to working and/or interacting with civil society and in interacting with individuals whose human rights may have been violated or restricted as a result of their work of defending rights; Proven awareness of the particular risks faced by and particular protection needs of specific groups of human rights defenders, such as women human rights defenders, defenders working on sexual orientation and gender identity issues, ethnic and religious minorities, non-nationals, members of political opposition groups, people in a disadvantaged socio-economic situation, journalists and media workers and youth/children human rights defenders; Experience in interacting with actors impacting the work of human rights defenders, such as: Security forces Armed groups; and Transnational corporations and other business enterprises; Experience in the development and delivery of human rights and rule of law assistance/capacity building, including the training of law enforcement and legal professionals and other officials responsible for the protection of human rights defenders; the ability to conduct both academic and field research required, and experience in carrying out fact-finding missions.

4. Flexibility/readiness and availability of time to perform effectively the functions of the mandate and to respond to its requirements, including conducting visits, preparing reports and attending Human Rights Council and General Assembly sessions.

[Checklist: Willingness and ability to conduct in-country investigations, in all regions of the world, into government policies, legislation and practices affecting human rights defenders and their work; Energy, determination and vision to promote the effective and comprehensive implementation of the Declaration on human rights defenders; A commitment to uphold the integrity, independence and impartiality of the Special Rapporteur’s mandate and the special procedures system as a whole;  Willingness and ability to devote a substantial proportion of working hours to fulfilling the mandate, which includes undertaking two to three country missions per year, preparing and presenting reports to the Human Rights Council and the General Assembly (such as the annual thematic report, and country mission and follow-up reports), attending seminars and other UN meetings and acting on individual cases of violations of the rights of human rights defenders; Willingness and ability to act urgently when cases or situations so require.

APPOINTMENT PROCEDURE

Details and formalities about the nomination, selection and appointment of mandate holders are explained on the OHCHR Web site at http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/SP/Pages/Nominations.aspx. Applications have to be submitted through an online system.

http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/IOR42/002/2013/en/973e4b4a-a517-46ef-8080-59b3384e05d4/ior42022013en.pdf

Posted in Amnesty international, human rights, Human Rights Defenders, UN | 4 Comments »
Tags: Amnesty International, Candidate, human rights, Human Rights Defenders, independence, international procedures, international protection, International Service for Human Rights, ISHR, Margaret Sekaggya, Non-governmental organization, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Special Procedures, UN Human Rights Council, UN procedures, United Nations, United Nations Human Rights Council, United Nations Special Rapporteur, vacancy

Assessing Needs of Human Rights Defenders and Strategies for Collaboration: results of a workshop

June 20, 2013

As far back as October 2012 in Lima, Peru, during the 7th Assembly of the World Movement for Democracy, the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED – U.S.A) organised a workshop on one of my favorite topics: how the existing efforts for and among human rights defenders (HRDs) could more effectively meet the needs of endangered human rights defenders (HRDs) Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in human rights, Human Rights Defenders | Leave a Comment »
Tags: Antoine Bernard, ASEAN, cooperation, cooperation with UN, definition of HRD, human rights, Human Rights Defenders, International Criminal Court, International Federation for Human Rights, international procedures, international protection, Non-governmental organization, Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Swee Seng Yap, UN, World Movement for Democracy, World Organisation Against Torture

Coming soon: 11-15 February on-line conversation on the UN Human Rights Council

February 8, 2013

You can join the International Service for Human Rights (ISHR) and the New Tactics online community for an online conversation on Engaging the United Nations Human Rights Council from February 11 to 15 2013.

When utilized strategically, the HRC can be a powerful force for change. There are several different ways that human rights organizations can engage the HRC, including: providing reports for the Universal Periodic Review, sending complaints to the Special Procedures, and raising situations of human rights violations in the plenary sessions of the HRC. The key is to know when to use which approach, and how to maximize your efforts.

This online conversation will be an opportunity to exchange experiences, lessons-learned and ideas among practitioners who have successfully engaged the HRC. The HRC starts its main session on February 25.

For help on how to participate in this conversation, please check out these online instructions.

Conversation Leaders:

Heather Collister

International Service for Human Rights (ISHR)

Michael Ineichen

International Service for Human Rights (ISHR)

Paola Salwan Daher

Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies

Anita Goh

NGO GROUP FOR THE CRC

http://www.ishr.ch/council/376-council/1442-join-an-online-conversation-on-engaging-the-united-nations-human-rights-council

http://www.newtactics.org/conversation/engaging-united-nations-human-rights-council

Posted in human rights | Leave a Comment »
Tags: HRC, human rights, human rights education, international procedures, International Service for Human Rights, ISHR, New Tactics online, Non-governmental organization, online conversation, politics, Special Procedures, strategy, UN, United Nations Human Rights Council, Universal Periodic Review

Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards