Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards

I have reported extensively over the last days on the question of growing judicial and administrative harassment of NGOs and human rights defenders, including the adoption of a resolution last week by the UN Human Rights Council recalling that “domestic law and administrative provisions […] should facilitate the work of human rights defenders, including by avoiding any criminalization, stigmatization, impediments, obstructions or restrictions thereof contrary to international human rights law”. Still, this is exactly what the Russian Federation is doing at the moment according to a statement by the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders: Hundreds of NGOs are being subjected to inspections by Government officials across the Russian Federation. This follows the adoption in 2012 of several laws contradicting the right to freedom of association, peaceful assembly and expression. …Since the end of February until today, dozens of inspections of NGOs have been launched in at least 13 regions of the Russian Federation, including Krasnodar, Moscow, Orenburg, Penza, Perm and Altai territories, St. Petersburg, Primorsky, Saratov and Rostov provinces. In St. Petersburg, the Spokesperson for the Office of the Prosecutor declared on March 19, 2013 that over the month some 5,000 inspections would be conducted to check compliance with the laws on terrorism, extremism as well as other offences. After this date, dozens of NGOs were inspected in St. Petersburg, including LGBT, human rights and environmental NGOs. Across the country, these operations have been conducted by prosecutors, together with, in some cases, officials from the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Federal Security Service FSB, the Ministry of Emergencies, the Federal Service for Supervision of Protection of Consumer Rights and Human Well-Being, the Tax Inspectorate, the Centre E, a unit specialised in anti-extremism, and even the fire service. According to the information received, inspections have particularly targeted groups that supposedly receive foreign funding and conduct monitoring or advocacy work. The scope of the inspections appears to be far-ranging, though inspectors have particularly insisted on the issue of funding. The massive character as well as methods used during inspections disproportionately interfere with the right to freedom of association: the number of inspections is massive, most inspections are unannounced, NGOs have been given short deadlines to provide a huge amount of documents and vague and non-exhaustive lists of requirements. In the case of prominent NGO Human Rights Centre “Memorial”, a pro-government TV crew was informed and present during the inspection. The news report entitled “Memorial hides its income from the Prosecutors Office” was broadcast the same day before the end of the inspection, in flagrant violation of the presumption of innocence. “Information on NGOs sources of funding are public. Read the rest of this entry »