On 4 April 2024 the Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA) announced the call for applications for the 2024 ASEAN Human Rights Advocacy Academy. The Academy is a capacity building platform for youth activists in Southeast Asia to gauge a strong understanding and skills to engage with the ASEAN Human Rights mechanism.
Since 2005, FORUM-ASIA has been actively engaged in the development and strengthening of the ASEAN human rights mechanisms. Against the backdrop of a global shrinking civic-space due to the rise of authoritarianism and a lack of capacities for civil society to meaningfully engage and influence law and policy making spaces, the Academy aims to bolster regional civil society participation and capacity to influence the regional human rights mechanisms to strengthen its human rights protection and promotion mandate.
The Academy will be held in-person for a total of five days (including travel days) in one of the Southeast Asian countries. It will consist of a series of knowledge sharing sessions and skills development workshops and field visits to engage with relevant stakeholders.
Programme:
The Academy, which will take place in the last week of May 2024 in one of the Southeast Asia countries (details will be shared upon announcement of successful application). Participants will be engaged in knowledge sharing and interactive group work involving the ASEAN and UN human rights mechanisms. They will meet with AICHR representatives, diplomatic missions, experts, and relevant regional stakeholders and gain first-hand insights into the workings of ASEAN and its human rights mechanisms.
Eligibility Criteria:
Youths of Southeast Asian nationality within the age of 18-35 who are in their early and mid-level stages of work or activism in human rights, peace and democracy. Those based in Southeast Asia will be prioritized.
All Southeast Asian individuals are eligible to apply regardless of race, ethnicity, color, SOGIESC, religion, disability, etc.
Application from FORUM-ASIA’s Southeast Asia member organizations will be welcomed
Prior knowledge or experience in engaging with regional or international human rights mechanisms is a plus. Those without prior knowledge or experience are also welcome to apply.
Interested applicants must complete this application form by midnight of 18 April 2024 (BKK time). Late applications will not be considered.
The Thomson Reuters Foundation on 19 April 2021 wrote about the treaty aimed at protecting activists in Latin America which could be a life-saving watershed in a region where scores are murdered each year. But the pact’s success will depend on the commitment of governments and big business, rights advocates said.
“We have suffered intimidation, harassment and death threats defending indigenous rights, and mother earth and its natural resources,” said Cunningham, an indigenous lawyer.
“It’s virtual warfare. ‘War means blood’ was one of the messages I received on Facebook,” said Cunningham, who heads the Centre for Justice and Human Rights of the Atlantic Coast of Nicaragua (CEJUDHCAN).
But in the world’s deadliest region for campaigners such as Cunningham, the Escazu agreement is raising hopes among some that they will be better protected, and cause the perpetrators of crimes to be brought to justice.
The accord, which comes into force on April 22, has been signed by 24 of the region’s 33 countries, so far, and formally ratified by 12. Nicaragua is among the dozen nations that have agreed to make it legally binding.
Beyond the treaty’s safeguards for activists, Cunningham said she hopes it will allow “the effective participation” of indigenous people in decisions about permits and concessions to companies such as mining firms and cattle ranchers.
The treaty also obligates countries to ensure activists can access public information on environmental cases and issues.
David R Boyd, the UN’s special rapporteur on human rights and the environment, said the “groundbreaking” treaty could be “a life-saving game changer”. “It is the first treaty in the world that includes specific obligations on governments to protect environmental and human rights defenders,” he said.
“Globally some Latin American countries have been hotspots of violence against environmental and human right defenders, and this treaty is directly intended to address that by raising the bar and creating obligations on governments.”
It could push countries to tighten their own laws to ensure crimes against environmentalists, which too often go unpunished, are investigated and perpetrators prosecuted, Boyd added.
In the Americas last year, 284 human rights defenders were killed, accounting for 86% of the global tally, according to data published this month by campaign group Front Line Defenders.
Colombia, which has signed the Escazu treaty, was the deadliest country for land rights activists and environmentalists last year, according to a 2020 report by advocacy group Global Witness. It found 64 land rights activists were killed in Colombia last year — up from 25 in 2018 — the highest level Global Witness has yet recorded in the country.
Honduras, which has not yet signed the Escazu pact, is another hotspot for violence, where in one recent attack in December masked men with guns and machetes gunned down an environmentalist activist in front of his family. Brazil is unlikely to ratify.
The treaty orders countries to set up bodies to monitor, report and ensure new rules are adhered to, and specifies the rights of environmentalists, including their right to freedom of expression, free movement and peaceful assembly.
Boyd said much of the conflict that places environmentalists in danger is driven by disagreements over projects led by extractive industries and failing to consult communities about activities on their lands.
For the treaty to work in practice, governments and companies must recognise the right of indigenous people to decide what happens on their lands and to be property informed and consulted about projects to stem violence, he said.
“That straightforward step would actually prevent a lot of the conflicts that are leading to peoples’ lives being placed in jeopardy,” he said.
Government commitment to ensure adequate resources and changes in corporate values will also be key, said Marina Comandulli, a campaigner at advocacy group Global Witness.
“[It will only work] if it is properly funded, if every country in the region commits to implementing it, and if big companies start putting people and planet first,” she said, adding that attitudes must shift, too.
“Defenders are routinely threatened, criminalised and killed in Latin America and the Caribbean. Often, that violence is linked to corporate activity, and governments have been complicit in perpetrating it,” she said.
“Defenders are central in the fight against the climate crisis … we need a zero-tolerance approach to violence and to threats.”
On 1 March 2021 Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA) and its members from Myanmar, namely Progressive Voice and Equality Myanmar, published a joint statement calling on the ASEAN Foreign Ministers Meeting (AFMM) of 2 March to take genuine and meaningful actions to call out the horrific acts of the Myanmar military and to explore a possibility to generate a regional response to address the situation,’ .
‘The ASEAN response to the crisis must align with UN Human Rights Council’s stance on rejecting the coup, de-escalating the military junta’s brutality, ensuring the safety of those who oppose the military as well as ensuring the fulfilment of their rights, and imposing targeted economic sanctions against military leaders, military-linked entities and cronies,’ said Shamini Darshni Kaliemuthu, FORUM-ASIA’s Executive Director.
Since the Myanmar military illegitimately seized power, the Assistance Association for Political Prisoners has documented at least 1,132 people to have been arbitrarily arrested, charged or sentenced. On 28 February alone, the military’s deliberate acts of extreme violence against peaceful protesters had killed 18 people and wounded at least 30…
On 19 February 2021, 69 civil society organisations across Southeast Asia issued ASEAN an open letter to demand a response to the situation in Myanmar. They called for ASEAN to urge the military junta to immediately and unconditionally release all those detained, refrain from using violence against protesters, and ensure the safety and security of people in Myanmar, including pro-democracy activist, human rights defenders, journalists and youth protesters.
‘ASEAN’s response must comply with the Myanmar’s peoples’ aspiration and the stance made by civil society in the region,’ said Aung Myo Min, Equality Myanmar’s Executive Director.
While the groups acknowledged efforts made by ASEAN on addressing the situation in Myanmar, through a statement from the ASEAN Chairman, individual Member States as well as the statements from four individual representatives from Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand to the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR), uncertainty remains if the regional body’s actions will reflect the will of the people of Myanmar. It also remains to be seen if the responses from the UN Security Council and international mechanisms addressing the urgent situation in Myanmar are taken into account. Given the severity of the situation, the fact that five ASEAN Member States, namely Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Laos, Philippines, Vietnam, are either unwilling to ‘interfere’ or demonstrate persistent silence under the pretext of respecting Myanmar’s ‘internal affairs’, is alarming…
The groups reiterate that the decreasing trust in ASEAN are attributed to its failure to meet this crucial moment, take action, and its persistent silence and weak position on addressing the prolonged crises in Myanmar, including the Rohingya crisis perpetrated by the same military regime that has unlawfully seized power.
‘Finding a solution that aligns with the will of the people of Myanmar and international mechanisms to meaningfully address the situation and recognise Myanmar people’s brave and unwavering sacrifices to restore democracy, rule of law and protection of their human rights and dignity are essential to regain the public’s trust in ASEAN,’ said Nang Zun Moe, Progressive Voice’s Executive Director.
For a PDF version of this statement, please click here.
For a second consecutive year, Amnesty International has documented how African governments are grossly undermining regional human rights bodies by failing to comply with their decisions, ignoring their urgent appeals, neglecting to report to them on national human rights situations and starving them of resources they desperately need for operations. Governments also neglected the rights of people with disabilities and older persons by failing to ratify treaties relating to their protection.
“Given the magnitude of gross human rights violations across the continent, regional human rights bodies play a critical role in providing justice and accountability,” said Netsanet Belay, Amnesty International’s Director for Research and Advocacy.
“These mechanisms must be protected and fully supported. They serve as vital alternative channels for people to seek justice and effective remedies when national systems are compromised or inadequate.”
Amnesty International’s report reviews and analyses the performance of Africa’s human rights treaty bodies: the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (African Commission); the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (African Children’s Committee); and the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (African Court).
Existential crisis for African human rights court
The report raises alarm that future of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights is in jeopardy following decisions by three governments – Benin, Côte d’Ivoire and Tanzania – to withdraw the right of individuals and NGOs to directly file cases before the court. Rwanda withdrew this right in 2016 bringing to four the number of countries that are now restricting access to this vital pathway to justice.
Amnesty International found that Benin, Côte d’Ivoire and Tanzania withdrew this right in response to decisions they perceived as unfavorable, and amid rising intolerance towards human rights defenders and a general deterioration of human rights conditions nationally…..
Tanzania has moved to block the right of individuals and NGOs to directly file cases against the government at the regional rights court, sparking fears of increased repression in the eastern African nation. Last month, the government said it was withdrawing from a protocol that allows cases to be filed against it at the African Court on Human and People’s Rights (AfCHPR) for which a notification was sent to the African Union (AU). It explained that the provisions had been implemented “contrary to the reservations” submitted by Tanzania.
Speaking with The Citizen, Minister for Justice and Constitutional Affairs Dr Augustine Mahiga confirmed that the government had taken action on the decision to withdraw but Tanzania was only asking for a review of a protocol it had deemed “contentious.”
The move has attracted local and international concern with activists raising alarm considering the already poor human rights situation in Tanzania since President John Magufuli came into power in 2015. According to international human rights group, Amnesty International, the withdrawal of such rights will rob people and organizations in Tanzania a vital avenue to justice, in a country whose justice system is deeply flawed.
Reports show that Tanzania has the highest number of cases filed by individuals and NGOs as well as judgments issued against it by the African Court. Of the 70 decisions issued by the Arusha-based AfCHPR as of September 2019, 28 decisions or 40 percent, were on Dodoma.
In addition to the impact on the rights situation and justice system in the country, the move by Tanzania has widespread implications on the authority and legitimacy of the African rights court. The AfCHPR plays an important role in the continent’s judicial system, with judges from across the AU working on rights cases. As of January, only nine countries of the 30 that had ratified the protocol had made declarations allowing NGOs and individuals to file suits against governments at the court, which became fully operational in 2010. Tanzania now becomes the second country to withdraw the right of individuals and NGOs to directly access the court after Rwanda, which pulled out in 2016. The implication of this is that it sets a path for other repressive states to follow, encouraging repression and human rights violations in the region.
Meanwhile, the international community has called for reconsideration by the East African country. “As the host of the African Court, Tanzania should lead by example and reconsider the decision to withdraw its declaration, demonstrating its support and commitment to the success of the court,” Biegon of AI said.
“We regret the decision by Tanzania Govt [government] to block individuals and NGOs from taking cases to African Court on Human & Peoples’ Rights,” the United Nations human rights office said in a tweet this week. “We urge Govt to reconsider. The Court is crucial for justice & accountability in Tanzania.”
This new Amnesty International report, to be published annually, will serve as a regular audit of the performance of the three regional human rights institutions in Africa: the African Commission; the African Child Rights Committee; and the African Court. Beginning with this inaugural review, it will be published every 21 October in commemoration of the adoption of the African Charter on this day in 1981.
African rights bodies are frustrated at every turn by the lack of cooperation and support from African Union (AU) member states who desperately try to undermine their independence and autonomy, according to a new report published by Amnesty International. The new report, The State of African Regional Human Rights Bodies and Mechanisms, found that the continent’s rights bodies are working in harsh conditions whereby their decisions are blatantly ignored and their pleas for proper funding and human resources persistently fall on deaf ears.
“Africa’s human rights bodies are being wilfully subverted. The African Union’s Executive Council must resist these efforts and take its responsibility to monitor and enforce compliance with the decisions of the human rights mechanisms seriously,” said Netsanet Belay, Amnesty International’s Director for Research and Advocacy.
The report offers an assessment of the performance of three of Africa’s regional human rights institutions between January 2018 and June 2019: the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (African Commission); the African Child Rights Committee; and the African Court.
It found that out of the continent’s 54 countries, five (Comoros, Equatorial Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Sao Tome and Principe and Somalia) have not submitted a single report on the human rights situation in their countries since they ratified the Africa Charter for Human and People’s Rights. Many countries that submitted their human rights reports to the African Commission during the reporting period did so after delays in excess of a decade. Gambia and Eritrea set records by submitting their reports 21 and 19 years late respectively.
In the timeframe in review, the African Commission sent 83 urgent appeals to states over concerns of human rights violations. Of these only 26 (31 percent) received a written response. The African Commission further requested 27 country visits, of which only 13 were authorized in principle, and just five materialized.
Despite facing many stubborn challenges, African human rights bodies registered a relatively impressive record in developing new norms and standards including developing a draft treaty on the rights to social protection and social security. The African Commission also published seminal studies on transitional justice and on human rights in conflicts. The African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (African Court) issued 25 decisions. However, only Burkina Faso had fully complied with the court’s decisions by the end of the reporting period. Some countries, including Tanzania, partially complied, while Cote d’Ivoire, Kenya, Libya and Rwanda didn’t comply at all.
“Both the African Commission and the African Court face a chronic backlog problem because of a slow pace in determining cases. They must urgently develop plans to speed up determinations and ensure strict adherence to time limits for parties, especially state parties,” said Netsanet Belay.
The report also highlights an onslaught on human rights defenders in Africa. Between January 2018 and June 2019, appeals for protection of HRDs accounted for 71 percent of all appeals issued to state parties by the African Commission. HRDs in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Egypt were the worst hit, the Africa Commission issuing 11 and 10 urgent appeals respectively to their governments. These were closely followed by Burundi with seven urgent appeals, Cameroon and Algeria each with six, and Uganda and Sudan, each with five appeals.
It is extremely alarming that governments across Africa have singled out human rights defenders to try to silence them and bring an end to their activism through brutal attacks, harassment, unlawful arrest and detention. Attacks on human rights defenders are an attack on the rights of all the people whose freedoms they are fighting for.
In this short video, Basil Fernandoexplains the preparation for updating of the Asian Charter for Human Rights – A People’s Charter which was launched in Gwangju, South Korea in May 1998. The Asian region has never been able to agree on a regional system (such as in Europe, the Americas and Africa). This Video explains the purpose for which this People’s Charter was adopted, the process of consultations which led to the drafting of the Charter, the consultations held and the final adoption. The Asian Charter was launched as a joint effort of the Asian Human Rights Commission, a regional organisation based in Hong Kong, and the May 18 Memorial Foundation based in Gwangju, South Korea. The Video has been produced by Amila Sampath.
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.
On 20 June the ISHR Monitor published a portrait of Indonesian human rights defender Yuyun Wahyuningrum:
When human rights were included in the ASEAN Charter, which was adopted in 2008, Yuyun Wahyuningrum saw an opportunity to promote human rights discourse in the region through advocacy at ASEAN. Yuyun currently works as senior advisor on ASEAN and human rights for the Human Rights Working Group, a coalition of over 50 organisations working on human rights in Indonesia.
“Principles and values in human rights are something that we cannot negotiate” While the inclusion of human rights in the ASEAN Charter, and the creation of the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR) in 2009 were concrete steps forwards in terms of promoting a human rights discourse, they also threw up challenges. One challenge has been the attempt by ASEAN States to impose their own interpretations of human rights standards that veer away from universality. It is imperative, says Yuyun, that AICHR should focus on complementing the global human rights system rather than breaking away from the principle of the universality of human rights.
“The role of civil society in influencing the debate is imperative” “AICHR will only gain legitimacy and authority on human rights if it develops a stronger partnership with civil society”
As an intergovernmental body AICHR struggles to balance its roles as a political body and as a human rights commission. The representatives of States on AICHR are nominated by governments and can be removed by them at any time. This has led to a lack of independence and a lack of political will to engage with its stakeholders, including the victims of human rights violations. Furthermore, ASEAN member States have been reticent in providing financial and technical support for the body which severely limits its capacity….Currently, AICHR is developing its ‘Guidelines on AICHR’s relations with civil society organisations’, which is to set out the modalities by which civil society can engage with the Commission. However the drafting process has been completely non-transparent to the extent that not only is it unclear when the document will be finalised, but it also remains to be seen whether the guidelines will promote or close down engagement by civil society.
“There is no ASEAN community without protection of human rights, especially the rights of those who defend the human rights of others” AICHR is not making any effort to interpret its mandate creatively so as to give itself the tools it needs to promote and protect human rights, including the ability to receive and investigate individual petitions, conduct country visits, issue precautionary measures to States, establish an effective early-warning system and response to emergency situations, and appoint independent experts. One interesting initiative was in fact proposed by a State. Indonesia invited AICHR to hear its report on the human rights situation in the country. This was inspired by the practice of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR). Thailand has agreed to be the next State to report to AICHR in August 2014. The regularisation of this initiative would be one way for AICHR to gain information on the situation of human rights in ASEAN States, as it is mandated to do.
“After the first cycle of UPR the improvement of human rights in ASEAN countries still needs to be assessed in detail” As far as the international human rights system is concerned, and in particular the UPR and its impact on ASEAN States, the same resistance to international standards can be seen. For example, many of the recommendations accepted by ASEAN States are in those areas where they are most comfortable and confident that they have made progress such as the rights of persons with disabilities, human rights education, right to housing, women’s rights and children’s rights, amongst others. The recommendations most commonly raised by the international community, however, include torture, the protection of human rights defenders, freedom of opinion and expression, and cooperation with civil society at the national level, areas ASEAN States are reluctant to tackle. However, one improvement that has been seen in ASEAN countries through the UPR is a growing ratification rate of international instruments. While this may largely be because States see these as easy recommendations to satisfy, it does also provide tools for civil society in the struggle to ensure that universal human rights standards are not being diluted in the region.
For more information on the work of Yuyun and the Human Rights Working Group see http://www.hrwg.org/
Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards 