Posts Tagged ‘United States’

Human Rights Defenders in the USA: fighting the looney right

February 8, 2013

In the aftermath of the killings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, at the end of last year, I came across a post that used the word ‘human rights defenders’ to describe those who publicly countered attempts to blame the victims or to scold the teachers for not being religious enough or being too soft. I decided to sit on it for a while as the shock and emotions run too high and is seemed all very political. Now, on reflection I have decided to share it here as it certainly clarifies the climate in which liberal groups (such as People For the American Way) have to operate in parts of the USA. The qualification Human Rights Defenders in the end seems about right to me. The article reads in part:

“..grief stricken and appalled Human Rights Defenders throughout the nation called on citizens Tuesday to reject extremist hate messages American leaders and groups have relayed, as the nation mourns the tragic and horrific loss of 20 children and six adults“, such as “God caused the shooting” and singing “praise to God for the glory of his work in executing his judgment.” [Only hours after the tragedy Shirley Phelps-Roper of the Westboro Baptist Church group’s  tweeted: “Westboro will picket Sandy Hook Elementary School to sing praise to God for the glory of his work in executing his judgment.”]

Mike Huckabee and Bryan Fischer (of the American Family Association) both implied that the school shooting occurred on public schools for adhering to the separation of church and state — saying God let the massacre happen because we’ve moved away from things like compulsory prayer (1). Echoing Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson in the wake of 9/11 (who also, in part, blamed that tragedy on People For the American Way), Focus on the Family’s James Dobson said God has ‘allowed judgment to fall upon us’ because the nation has turned its back on him by accepting things like abortion and gay marriage.”(2). The Tea Party Nation has called the teachers “radicals in the classrooms,” accusing them of being part of a liberal plot to “destroy the family” and create a society that “coddled” the shooter (3).

  1. http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/fischer-god-didnt-stop-ct-school-shooting-because-hes-gentleman-who-doesnt-go-where-he-not-w
  2. http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/dobson-connecticut-shooting-was-god-allowing-judgment-fall-upon-us-turning-our-back-him
  3. http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/tea-party-nation-attacks-teachers-over-ct-school-shooting

The references above provide links to the statements mentioned in the article of 19 December 2012 which can be found in full on : http://www.examiner.com/article/god-did-not-cause-it-human-rights-defenders-say-1

 

Human Rights First to hold Human Rights Summit: 4-5 December

November 29, 2012

 

On December 4-5, 2012, Human Rights First will convene the inaugural Human Rights Summit: American ideals. Universal values, marking the 64th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The Summit is designed to bring international civil society activists, U.S. policymakers, military and business leaders together to look at U.S. global leadership on human rights. Human Rights First believes that American leadership is necessary to secure human rights around the world. We hope you will join us as we celebrate progress and address the challenges ahead. Sessions during the two-day Summit will cover human rights issues including the Arab Spring, emerging technologies, immigration reform, and more. Senators Richard Durbin (D – IL) and John McCain (R-AZ), Chairman of the United Civil Front Garry Kasparov, President of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission Dr. Richard Land, and Vice President of Communications and Public Policy at Facebook Elliot Schrage will join us as guest speakers.

Human Rights First also invites you to the screening of the award-winning film THE HOUSE I LIVE IN on Tuesday, December 4, at 7 p.m. The screening will be followed by a discussion with acclaimed filmmaker Eugene Jarecki, who received the Grand Jury Prize at this year’s Sundance Film Festival for this film. This event is free and open to the public

 

Space is limited. Reserve <http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=kHQZD8AfBaT%2FEULL8Hi1yi%2BQnID0Npd%2F>  your spot today!

Register for sessions now! <http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=3twClNNnpynWcNjK3OOtRy%2BQnID0Npd%2F>

 

Wished I was there when Chen Guangcheng embraced Christian Bale

November 17, 2012

Elisa Massimino, President and CEO of New York based Human Rights First describes the scene as follows:

It was the most striking moment of our annual Human Rights Dinner, one that was shown on TV and across the Internet: Chen Guangcheng, in tears, embracing actor Christian Bale. Last year when Chen was under house arrest in China, authorities rebuffed Bale when he tried to visit the “barefoot lawyer.” The two met for the first time—with a hug—when Bale presented Chen with our Human Rights Award.

What gave this moment its power was Chen’s story: his teaching himself the law so that he could help others; his courage in the face of repeated persecution; his heroic journey from house arrest to the American embassy.

His story is ongoing. We gave him the award—and he accepted it—to highlight the need to help public interest lawyers and other persecuted Chinese citizens. They include his nephew, Chen Kegui, who—after defending himself and his family when government thugs broke into their home—was charged with a crime and imprisoned. “This award,” Chen said in his speech, “for me and for my colleagues, is an example of the waves building and gathering power. Together, we are the rising tide of kindness, decency and respect for the rule of law.”

While the dinner is an occasion for us to honor activists and others who have contributed to the struggle for human rights, it is also a chance for our organization to renew our commitment to challenging the United States to live up to its ideals. As Chen said, “My hope is that all of us, as we go forward, will make human rights a priority.”

I think it shows the power of awards

Burma frees 450 prisoners before Obama’s visit but what about the real HRDs?

November 15, 2012
Official photographic portrait of US President...

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Human rights campaigners say no dissidents are among prisoners to be released in ‘goodwill gesture’ reports Jason Burke in Delhi (guardian.co.uk, Thursday 15 November 2012)

The Guardian and many other newspapers have announced that the Burmese authorities have freed more than 450 detainees in a goodwill gesture before a historic visit by the US president Obama but local and international human rights campaigners said the list of released prisoners did not include any political dissidents.

Announcing the amnesty – the latest in a series that have coincided with high-profile visits of foreign dignitaries or trips by senior Burmese leaders overseas – state media said late on Wednesday that its aim was “to help promote goodwill and the bilateral relationship”. A home ministry official told Reuters that a certain number of the remaining 300 political prisoners would be released. However Bo Kyi, of the Thailand-based Assistance Association for Political Prisoners (AAPP), said no prisoners of conscience had been freed so far. “All are common criminals or foreign nationals …… We know of no political prisoners among the 452 freed today,” he said.

However the Wall Street Journal (15 Nov)  just reported that U Myint Aye, a 61-year-old human rights activists and one of the most high-profile dissidents currently detained, held at Loikaw, was included.

No word on Aung Naing either (see my post of 24 September this year).

Let’s wait and see whether President Obama is willing to press for a more substantive release.

Human Rights First gives Obama its agenda for human rights

November 8, 2012
Official photographic portrait of US President...

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

Human Rights First (HRF), a New York based international NGO and member on the Jury of the Martin Ennals Award, reacted with speed to Obama’s reelection and issued a statement of what it thinks is ready for bi-partisan action on human rights:

 

1. Champion Women’s Rights. A record number of women will serve in the U.S. Senate in January. And Republicans and Democrats—men and women—agree on the importance of protecting women’s rights around the world. The Obama administration and Congress should work together to make sure that women’s rights are enshrined in the Egyptian constitution and that women in the region who stood side by side with men in demanding their freedom are fully represented in public life, including in elected legislatures, and not forced out of the public square.

 

2. Support Freedom. Last night, President Obama said, “We can never forget that as we speak people in distant nations are risking their lives right now just for a chance to argue about the issues that matter.” The United States should stand with those people. That means pressing our allies—like Bahrain—to stop cracking down on dissent. It means working effectively with the international community to bring an end to the human rights crisis in Syria. And it means supporting activists in repressive societies like Russia, China, and Cuba.

 

3. Protect Freedom of Religion. As the recent furor over the anti-Islam film showed, the second Obama administration will have to navigate difficult issues at the intersection of religion and foreign policy. In his second term, the President should push back against efforts to impose an international standard outlawing “defamation of religions,” which would be used, like national blasphemy laws in countries like Pakistan, to persecute religious minorities and restrict freedom of speech, and which would fuel sectarian violence and empower extremists.

 

4. Protect Gay and Lesbian People from Violence. Voters in Maryland, Maine, and Washington voted to legalize same-sex marriage-the first time gay marriage won at the ballot box. Wisconsin elected the first openly gay U.S. Senator. But while the tide of public opinion on gay rights has rapidly turned here, around the world, gay and lesbian people face discrimination and violence. In his second term, President Obama should build on the work of his first to provide protection for gay and lesbian people, including those forced to flee for their safety.

 

5. Provide Safe Haven for Refugees. Washington may finally be poised to tackle comprehensive immigration reform. While this issue has been politically challenging, there is broad bipartisan support for keeping America’s promise to be a refuge for those fleeing oppression. For starters, that means reforming the policies that land those seeking freedom in jail.

 

6. Close Guantanamo. Before it became a political football, national security experts and elected officials from both parties agreed that Guantanamo needed to close. President George W. Bush said he wanted to close it. Senator John McCain campaigned on it. And on his second full day in office, President Obama, flanked by retired Admirals and Generals, promised to do it. He doubled down on the Daily Show right before the election. Now it’s time to get it done. This is a legacy issue.

 

http://actions.humanrightsfirst.org/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=6824

 

Palestinian HRD Nariman Tamimi speaks out on repression of peaceful protest in AI video

November 5, 2012

In Greece there is a frequently heard ‘complaint’ that international human rights groups – in particular AI – have the same agenda as the USA. At a recent meeting with friends in Chania, AI’s position on Pussy Riot was quoted as evidence.

I countered by pointing out that AI on many occasions has taken a stand that seems to go against US policy, from the death penalty to Guantanamo Bay and the Israeli occupied territories. A recent video referred to here makes that clear again in the case of Israel. Perhaps even more shocking are some of the comments that seems to confirm the existence of an orchestrated response [by whom?] to equal any criticism of Israel to anti-Semitism.

Every Friday since December 2009 residents of al-Nabi Saleh and solidarity activists gather around noon in the village centre and march peacefully towards the spring. They have been met repeatedly with unnecessary and excessive force by the Israeli army including the use of stun grenades, pepper spray, batons and guns. Demonstrations are dispersed as soon as they begin and are usually not allowed to reach the spring. The Israeli army raids the village regularly, usually during the night, and conducts house searches and arrests, including the arrest of children under the age of 15.

Israeli military laws in place in the West Bank impose sweeping and arbitrary restrictions on freedom of expression and peaceful assembly, requiring people to obtain advance permission from the Israeli military for any proposed gathering of 10 or more persons “for a political purpose of for a matter that could be interpreted as political”.  Nariman Tamimi told Amnesty International that in al-Nabi Saleh and all areas where there is popular resistance, police use extreme violence, noting that “there is nothing [to the protests] except that you chant and express your opinion.” As one of the organizers of the al-Nabi Salneh protests and a coordinator of the village’s popular committee, Bassem Tamimi and his family have been the target of harsh treatment by the Israeli army.  For more see the excellent film:

AI video on Palestinian protest

 

US-based NGOs enter presidential race with recommendations on HRDs

August 10, 2012

Back from a long break, I start with a substantive post although I dod not have to do much writing. Last week 22 human rights organizations – including the 3 on the Jury of the MEA: AI, HRW, HRF – issued a common report listing the ten most pressing issues for the next US President. Stewart M. Patrick of the Council of Foreign Relations in his blog the Internationalist made my life easy by summarizing the point (see his: http://blogs.cfr.org/patrick/2012/08/07/ten-critical-human-rights-issues-for-the-next-president/). For the text of point 4 relating to HRDs, go to the full document in PDF: http://www.freedomhouse.org/article/ten-critical-human-rights-challenges-next-american-president

1)      Prioritize U.S. leadership on international norms and universality of human rights: Despite the flaws of multilateral bodies like the UN Human Rights Council, they provide crucial legitimacy to U.S. pressure for human rights. Notably, the report points out that engagement is necessary, however frustrating it may be: “By withdrawing from these institutions or restricting funding, the United States forfeits its leadership…and undermines of [sic] its ability to advance its own interests.”

2)      Act to prevent genocide and mass atrocities and ensure accountability: The next president should build on the painstaking progress that NGOs and governments have achieved over the past decades by sustaining political will and “matching resources to rhetoric…The next administration should support the APB [Atrocities Prevention Board] and provide it with the necessary resources.” In addition, going it with others, versus going it alone, lends legitimacy to U.S. atrocity-prevention efforts and helps defray suspicions that the United States is purely acting  for self-interested political reasons.

3)      Pursue policies that protect people from the threat of terrorism while respecting human rights both at home and abroad: Balancing human rights and terrorist prevention remains an enormous challenge. Specifically, the report recommends two steps: end indefinite detention without charge or trial, and publicly clarify the criteria for lethal targeting and rendition. While terrorism understandably prompts desire for urgent and harsh action, sacrificing human rights at home and abroad carries dangerous, long-term consequences.

4)      Oppose the coordinated global assault on civil society, including the murder, criminalization, and vilification of human rights defenders: This is not a simple task, but the authors offer five actionable steps to mitigate the worst effects of repressive regimes from Ethiopia to Belarus to Venezuela, such as U.S. funding to civil society and media organizations and guidelines for U.S. agencies to support human rights defenders.

5)      Proactively address the democracy and human rights opportunities and challenges presented by the Arab Uprisings: Among a number of recommendations, the report notes that the Obama administration’s “limited pressure for reform” toward Arab monarchies has been disappointing, and that the next administration should condition military aid to Bahrain on progress toward political reform, more forcefully pressure Egypt’s military to transfer power to an elected government, and step up diplomatic and economic pressure on Syria’s Assad regime.

6)      Ensure that corporations avoid contributing to human rights violations in their operations and through their supply chains: The ten actionable steps presented in the report provide feasible options to reduce horrifying violations of human rights in many corporation’s global supply chains. They include implementation of the 1977 Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and ensuring that it “is not amended to erode the core intent of the law” as well as releasing “final rules for Sections 1502 and 1504 of the Dodd-Frank Act” (PDF) and implementing the law “in line with congressional intent.”

7)      Bolster accountability and access to services and justice for survivors of sexual and gender-based violence: The horrors of mass rapes, sexual assault, female genital mutilation, human trafficking, “so-called ‘honor killings,’ ” forced marriage, and domestic violence require a “deeper and more thorough response.” Along with continuing to press for accountability and enforcing a zero-tolerance policy for gender-based crimes perpetrated by U.S. government employees or contractors, the next administration should “expand support for international programs that increase access to health care, educational opportunities, and judicial institutions for girls and women” and increase visas for victims of gender-based violence.

8)      Review the United States’ relationships and alliances with governments that violate human rights:  This has consistently been one of the most difficult lines to walk. Regarding relationships with authoritarian regimes, the authors argue that “Washington policymakers often underestimate the political and moral capital America has, or refuse to use it.” They add, “Despite the recognition that the United States’ largely uncritical partnerships with repressive regimes in the Middle East undermined long-term U.S. interests, old mistakes are being repeated around the world. The United States has largely neglected human rights as it collaborated on counterterrorism with Ethiopia, Saudi Arabia, and other authoritarian partners.” Therefore, the authors call on the next U.S. president to review U.S. relations with authoritarian governments with a fresh perspective. In addition, U.S. diplomats on the ground should engage with democracy activists or civil society groups. The administration should also introduce targeted visa bans and asset freezes on foreign government officials implicated in rights violations.

9)      Support international justice and accountability for human rights violators present in the United States: To reduce impunity for gross violations of international law, such as genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes, the United States must support accountability for leaders or compatriots who carry out heinous abuses. As I have written previously, the false peace-justice tradeoff is no reason to go easy on the most violent dictators. To further this progress, the report urges the next administration to “close legal loopholes in the federal war-crimes law and press for crimes against humanity committed abroad to be a federal crime so human rights violators in the United States can be held to account.”

10)   Support policies at home and abroad that respect the rights of asylum seekers, refugees, migrants, and immigrants: The authors lament that the United States “has failed, in a number of ways, to protect the human rights of refugees and migrants.” Regrettably, the report continues, “the United States detained nearly 400,000 asylum seekers and immigrants last year, often without individual assessments or prompt court review of detention” and the list goes on of documented U.S. violations of migrant and refugee rights, as confirmed by both bipartisan domestic reviews and international observer missions. As the report lays out, the next administration must reform the U.S. immigration detention system, stop fostering racial profiling through immigration enforcement, and ensure accountability for human rights abuses by the Border Patrol and at points of entry. Protecting human rights must start at home.

http://www.freedomhouse.org/article/ten-critical-human-rights-challenges-next-american-president

‘media framing’ and the independence of the judiciary: the case of water boarding

April 30, 2012

What follows are my  SPEAKING NOTES ON THE OCCASION OF THE NJCM-THOOLEN AWARD  on Thursday 26 April 2012, the Hague. At this gathering of the Dutch Lawyers Committee for Human Rights (NJCM) I had the honor to hand over the award for the best master thesis on human rights. 

Dear friends,

When the Dutch Lawyers Committee, in 2005, decided to make an award in my name, I was most touched, especially as they had apparently dropped the requirement that I should die first.  Being alive has the additional advantage that on occasion I will be able to hand over the award myself, which I will do with the greatest pleasure in a few moments. This pleasure is the greater as the winning master paper touched on a topic very close to my heart: the role of the media or as it is sometimes referred to the “Fourth Estate”. There is some controversy about who exactly coined the term, but the most telling statement comes from Oscar Wilde who wrote: “Somebody — was it Burke? — called journalism the fourth estate. That was true at the time no doubt. But at the present moment it is the only estate. It has eaten up the other three. …”. That was said in 1981 and it is hard to imagine that that Oscar Wilde would come to a different conclusion more than a century later.

Spinning (an important element in the toolkit of media framing) has become a profession and the title ‘spin doctor’ is quite appropriate as the results are indeed often doctored. There are surely great historical cases that we cannot recognise because we ourselves have been successfully framed; who knows what positive image Attila the Hun could have enjoyed if only his PR people had done a more professional job. To take a more serious and recent case: let’s look at the so-called ‘failure’ of the UN in Somalia. This was a combined UN-US operation with a humanitarian mandate. When in October 1993, 18 U.S. Rangers were killed in a fierce battle with Aideed’s forces and television showed the body of a dead American soldier being dragged through the streets, American public opinion overnight turned against further U.S. involvement in Somalia and Clinton pulled out all troops soon afterwards. Although the Rangers were part of Washington’s own separate Somalia operation, and the US did not want to function under UN command, the incident was played and replayed as a major “UN failure.” The UN was widely, and wrongly, blamed for the gruesome deaths of the U.S. Rangers, despite the fact that they were not part of the UN operation, something that President Clinton finally acknowledged in 1996. Yet most people around the worlds continue to hold the UN responsible. I am afraid that each of us can probably come up with a favorite case of the media having got the better of the truth but that should not be tonight’s debate.

Laura Henderson in her paper “Tortured reality” has gone one important step further. She has investigated how media framing of waterboarding affects judicial independence. She had to limit herself to the US judiciary and to the specific case of ‘waterboarding’ in order to create an environment stable enough to draw some statistical conclusions. Her research is done very neatly. She makes clear that the concept of independence of the judiciary has always been defined broadly and not just as a prohibition of interference by the state, although that remains the classical background.  Cases of media pressure are dealt with in jurisprudence but they have always been considered in the context of an independent judge who is well-trained and not easily swayed by what the flimsy press has to say. The little jurisprudence there is does not contemplate a case of wilful, orchestrated influencing of all the media with the purpose of changing the perception and language of an existing concept.

What makes the study of Henderson stand out that it exactly tries pin down to what extent this has happened with the question whether the technique of ‘waterboarding’ changed in the minds of the judges after the 11 September watershed (no pun intended). The torrent of rhetoric not only framed everything in a ‘war’ context but also specifically tried to downplay the labelling of waterboarding as torture. And she did find the evidence. I will not reveal it all – you have to read for yourself the whole article once the NJCM has rightly published it. Laura herself indicates that further work is needed on how the independence of the judiciary is undermined by media framing and I hope that will be the case. She also gives some very useful indications of how the media framing could be countered, e.g. by strengthening the pluriformity of the media and raising the awareness of the judiciary. She describes her recommendations as ‘simple, yet effective”.  Here I beg to differ. There is nothing simple about changing the media landscape, especially if one adds the television and social media, which her study understandably had to leave out. The magnitude and multitude of media is such that no-one can really do much about it. All recent studies on the effect of the internet on our information intake show that they tend to solidify the dominant opinions/news/books etc, while giving great potential to small niche items, including the nutty and the genial. What gets squeezed is the moderate, considered, well-argued, balanced stuff in the middle. My fear is that the voice of the NJCM may well have the qualities described above!

In the end there can be only one winner. A feature of almost any award and painfully brought home two days ago in Geneva where I was for the announcement of the 3 nominees for 2012 Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders. All 3 nominees are extremely courageous Human Rights Defenders (Bahrain Centre for Human Rights, the multimedia monk form Cambodia, and Shirin Ebadi’s former lawyer: Nasrin Sotoudeh) and the Jury making the final choice on 2 October will have a hard time.

Still, the hard choices have been made already for the NJCM Thoolen Award – may I take this occasion to thank the Jury and Franka for their excellent work – and I am proud to hand over the prizes to the 3 finalists.

A balanced post on how the US should balance its human rights record

March 23, 2012

Under the title “A Diminished Force for Good” Tom Parker of USA AI posted on 21 March 2012 a piece that – in a frank way – argues that the US should act with regard to its own human rights problems in order to regain international influence. It takes the lead role of the US in getting a resolution on Sri Lanka (successfully) passed in the Human Rights Council in Geneva this week and contrasts it with how the US has dealt with human rights abuses in its own ambit.

As Amnesty’s recent report Locked Away: Sri Lanka’s security detainees makes clear, human rights abuses still continue to this day in Sri Lanka. Instances of arbitrary and illegal detention have been widely reported, as have acts of torture and extrajudicial execution. Tom Parker says “I know from my own personal experience of working with Sri Lankan human rights defenders that the climate of fear in which opponents of the Rajapaksa regime operate is all-pervasive. The situation in Sri Lanka is grave and the intervention of the United Nations is much needed. .However, welcome though the US-sponsored resolution is, it is greatly undermined by the embarrassing gap that exists between US rhetoric and US behavior. Critics have not been slow in pointing this out.”…”The complete failure of the United States to address the deliberate use of torture as an integral part of the War on Terror hugely diminishes its ability to put pressure on other states to adhere to human rights standards that it itself has ignored. And we are all the poorer for it.”

The alacrity with which the US Army has responded to the tragic deaths of sixteen Afghan villagers in Zangabad, Afghanistan, earlier this month demonstrates that accountability is nothing to be afraid of. Indeed it can be a powerful force for good….. The US is one of the [governments that actively promote human rights] but its influence has been greatly diminished over the past decade because of its reluctance to meaningfully address its own, very public, failings in this regard….We need a strong US voice speaking out for human rights in the world, but that can’t happen without real accountability at home.”

for the full text see: A Diminished Force for Good.