ISHR

IThe UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders, Michel Forst, has just launched what could be the most far-reaching global and country-level analysis of the situation for human rights defenders in over a decade.  With a focus on legal and administrative protections – or the absence of them – and State policy and practice, the World Report examines the situation for defenders in 140 countries and provides States with recommendations on how to better implement the 1998 UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders.

Forst concludes that across the globe, States are not only failing to implement the Declaration but actually go out of their way to frustrate its ambitions.  By restricting and attacking defenders, the States are wrecking their own chances of dealing with major global challenges, such as ensuring sustainable development, dealing with migration and climate change.

‘The Special Rapporteur makes the point that human rights defenders are essential partners to States. They should not be seen as the enemy,’ said ISHR’s Madeleine Sinclair.

In the decade since the 2006 Global Survey of Special Representative on Human Rights Defenders to the UN Secretary General, Hina Jilani, Forst notes that there have been positive advances.   The 2017 decree implementing a law on the protection of defenders in Cote d’Ivoire, for example, is said to have produced ‘a positive impact on several countries in the region where engagement from civil society or government institutions has resulted in similar legislation in other countries of the region.’ 

The development of laws and policies to support defenders, and the use of legal and administrative frameworks to both protect and persecute defenders are two of the major findings in the report.  The third attempts to revile and target human rights defenders, including through State sanctioned campaigned. Forst notes that even where States officials are not actively targeting defenders, they often fail to challenge criticism defenders advanced by powerful social, policial and economic interests.

The situation for defenders in many locations is bleak.  

‘The World Report documents the much discussed closing of civic space and suggests that it has become, in too many locations, a war on human rights defenders,' noted Forst.  

The findings draw from human rights reports of civil society organisations and individual defenders, as well as input from States and national human rights organisations.  

The Special Rapporteur was speaking to the report conclusions at the High Level Event on human rights defenders held at the UN General Assembly on 18^th December 2018.  

Contact: Madeleine Sinclair [email protected];  Eleanor Openshaw [email protected]

Photo: UN Geneva, Flickr

On 20 November 2018, the Inter-American Court on Human Rights (‘the Court’) approved the settlement in the case Escaleras Mejía et al. v. Honduras. The case concerned the 1997 killing of Carlos Escaleras, a mayoral candidate who was a proponent of the movement fighting for the environment. Escaleras had also led protests against government decisions that would have impacted the environment negatively. Before his death, Escaleras was threatened, pressured and offered bribes to withdraw his candidacy.

The Court found the State responsible for Escaleras’ death as well as for ongoing impunity in regard to the crime (despite the conviction of two people in relation to the case). The Court found that the State had not exhausted all methods of investigation and that the investigation itself was unreasonably delayed.  In addition, the Court places the death of Escaleras in a context of violence experienced by environmental defenders in the country, which continues to this day.

‘The Escaleras settlement and ruling are a positive step forward for human rights defenders everywhere,’ said Michel Forst, UN Special Rapporteur on the situation on Human Rights Defenders. ‘The Court took the context in which defenders work into account and issued a ruling addressing many of the pressing issues for defenders, including physical attacks and stigmatisation.’ 

Forst had filed an amicus brief to the Court. His amicus brief reiterated the standards contained in the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders. In addition, the amicus brief cited his reports related to the situation of human rights defenders.

The Honduran government recognised its role in Escaleras’ death and related human rights violations and agreed to take the following steps, amongst others:

1. To disseminate a documentary about the life and work of Carlos Escaleras as a human rights defender
2. To continue providing a course on environmental issues to secondary school teachers;
3. To guarantee the secondary and university education of Escaleras’ children 
4. To pursue investigations to define responsibilities, clarify the facts completely and, where appropriate, judge and punish the material and intellectual responsible. Honduras must remove the obstacles that maintain impunity, allow the participation of the victims and provide them with a report on the progress of the investigations
5. To approve and implement a protocol of due diligence for the investigation of crimes committed against human rights defenders and provide update on steps taken for the implementation of the protocol and its compliance status

‘This settlement is welcome in requiring the State to take steps in regard to challenging impunity in this particular case and more generally, as well as taking measures to promote the work of defenders,’ said ISHR’s Helen Nolan.

‘Disappointingly, however, in the settlement the Court still characterises the right to defend human rights as a set of rights the State must uphold, rather than a stand-alone right. We'd like to see the Court to acknowledge the right to defend human rights as a stand-alone right, as a means to deepen the guarantees for defenders,’ she noted. 

Contact: 

Helen Nolan,  [email protected] 

_{Photo credit:  Eli NW}

On 17 December, the General Assembly plenary took place to vote on human rights resolutions previously passed by the Third Committee. To see ISHR’s prior coverage of these resolutions, see the Third Committee Wrap Up piece here.

The freedom of peaceful assembly and association resolution passed with much stronger support. Eleven States joined in favour of the resolution - more than in the previous vote, bringing the total number to 154 in favour, 0 against, and 35 abstentions. New supporters included South Sudan, Djibouti, Mauritania and Eritrea. 

‘It is very encouraging for us that more States joined in supporting the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association, rights vital for the work of defenders,’ Eleanor Openshaw, ISHR’s New York Office Co-Director, stated.

The resolution on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions also gained support. The resolution gained 15 States voting in favour, bringing the number of votes to 125 in favour, 0 against, and 60 abstentions.

However, despite the support, Sudan took the floor to make a statement on its vote of abstention. Basing its decision on the language regarding the protections based on sexual orientation and identity, Sudan stated that in no other resolution is there language on gender relating to killings. 

‘It’s unfortunate that States won’t support these protections,’ lamented Tess McEvoy, ISHR Legal Counsel and Programme Manager. ‘While the resolution passed with more support, there is still more work to be done in this regard,’ she added. 

Other resolutions passed, such as the Human Rights Council Report resolution with a vote of 121 in favour, 4 against and 60 abstentions.

As for the child, early and forced marriage resolution, the resolution itself passed without a vote, but it also experienced some trouble. A vote was requested by the United States for the deletion of preambular paragraph 23 and operative paragraphs 14, 17 and 18. 

The United States cited its concern with the definition of ‘sexual and reproductive health,’ stating that it does not recognise abortion as a method of family planning. 

The paragraphs were overwhelmingly supported with 134 votes in favour, 2 against and 32 abstentions. As a result of the vote, the United States disassociated itself from these paragraphs. 

There were no votes on the bullying and the rights of the child resolution. 

The resolutions on Myanmar and Stevastopol were not voted on, as they are still being considered by the 5^th Committee, which handles monetary budget issues regarding resolutions.

Contact: Eleanor Openshaw at [email protected]. 

Photo Credit: IIP Photo Archive.

From the murder of Jamal Khashoggi to politically-motivated charges against Cambodian trade unionists, attacks on human rights defenders and civic freedoms across the world increasingly worry the business community.

The statement is the first of its kind, with supporters ranging across the mining, apparel, banking, jewellery and footwear sectors, and stresses that when human rights defenders are under attack, so is sustainable and profitable business.

On the 70th anniversary of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, the statement sends a clear message that the current wave of attacks is unacceptable for leading companies and investors.

Unilever, adidas, Primark, ABN AMRO, Anglo American, Leber Jeweler, Domini and the Investors Alliance on Human Rights are among the supporters.

These business and investors “affirm the crucial role of human rights defenders and [their] firm commitment to the protection of civic freedoms” and recognise the responsibility of businesses and investors to respect human rights defenders. Supporters of the statement commit “to find effective ways business can positively contribute to situations where civic freedoms and human rights defenders are under threat”.

As Paul Polman, CEO of Unilever & chair of The B Team, said: “Given the increasing vulnerability of human rights defenders and shrinking space where they can operate safely, business has a role and a responsibility to defend and promote fundamental rights and freedoms.”

“We stand firmly behind these principles, which are aligned with our own published approach to safeguarding human rights defenders and our longstanding belief in free, fair and open societies, where freedom of expression and assembly is the norm, not the exception”, said William Anderson, vice president social and environmental affairs Asia Pacific at the Adidas Group, the first company in the world to issue a stand-alone policy on human rights defenders.

''ABN AMRO is very happy to receive positive signals from clients after sharing our support for this statement. Many of our clients - especially NGOs - experience restrictions on their civic freedoms as well as access to financial services. This problem can only be effectively addressed in collaboration between governments, civil society and business”, said Maria Anne van Dijk, global head of environmental, social and ethical risk and policy at ABN AMRO.

Nearly six in ten countries are seriously restricting people’s fundamental freedoms of association, peaceful assembly and expression, while only 3% of people on the planet live in countries with truly ‘open civic space’, according to research by CIVICUS.

The work of civil society and human rights defenders to protect fundamental freedoms continues to be undermined by governments and actors in the private sector through a range of tactics, including threats and physical attacks, judicial harassment, burdensome administrative requirements, and limitations on the receipt of funding, among others.

Today’s statement stresses the crucial role of human rights defenders in identifying risks or problems in business activities, encouraging due diligence and in the provision of remedy.

Phil Bloomer, Executive Director of the Business & Human Rights Resource Centre (BHRRC), said: "Hats off to these ground-breaking companies and investors. In a context of worsening attacks on civic freedoms worldwide, this international group of companies speaks up to protect civic freedoms, human rights defenders, and rule of law. This is vital to workers and communities and wider society. It is also crucial to stable, profitable, and sustainable business. Other responsible businesses and investors should follow rapidly. There is no time to lose.”

Michael Ineichen, Programme Director of the International Service for Human Rights, said: “Human rights defenders work to ensure that every person has access to quality education, a decent job, secure housing, a healthy environment and a doctor when we’re sick. By standing alongside human rights defenders, leading companies protect this critical contribution to a more positive future.”

A recent report from The B Team found clear evidence that limits on important civic freedoms are linked to negative economic outcomes. Countries with higher degrees of respect for civic rights experience higher economic growth rates as well as higher levels of human development.

These ideas are further explored in a recent guidance document released by BHRRC and the International Service for Human Rights. It sets out the normative, business, and moral cases for action, and proposes a decision framework to guide companies on how to support civic freedoms and defenders.

Contact: Michael Ineichen, Programme Director, [email protected], +41 78 827 77 86 

ISHR welcomes the new monitoring guide published by The Association for the Prevention of Torture (APT): ‘Towards The Effective Protection Of LGBTI Persons Deprived of Their Liberty: A Monitoring Guide’ It is designed for any institution or organisation that carries out visits and inspections to places of deprivation of liberty, such as prisons, police custody and immigration detention facilities.  

‘ISHR is happy to have contributed to the development of this important tool, which highlights the situation of human rights defenders working to protect the rights of LGBTI persons,’ says Pooja Patel of ISHR.

This guide intends to strengthen the capacities of detention monitoring bodies – including National Preventive Mechanisms (NPMs), National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs), international and regional bodies, and civil society organisations – to identify and address risk factors contributing to torture and other ill-treatment of LGBTI persons deprived of liberty. It raises awareness of specific risks of abuse and discrimination these individuals face.

Specific risks for LGBTI defenders

The guide makes references to the Yogyakarta Principles and the Yogyakarta Principles plus 10 throughout the text, and underlines the aggravated forms of violence and discrimination faced by human rights defenders working on issues related to sexual orientation and gender identity. It discusses LGBTI defenders in three particular contexts:

• the impact of criminalisation of LGBT persons,
• discriminatory profiling and violence during arrest or apprehension, and
• the role of law enforcement during public demonstrations involving LGBTI persons.

ISHR’s Helen Nolan explains that the guide emphasises the fact that threats and risks faced by LGBTI defenders are exacerbated in countries that criminalise same-sex relations and non-conforming gender identities or expression, as defenders may face harassment, prosecution and imprisonment only because of their work and activism.

‘Human rights defenders who are LGBTI themselves are doubly exposed, as they are not only targeted because of their work, but also because of who they are,’ says Nolan.

The new guide stresses that LGBTI individuals are at greater risk of being arbitrarily arrested, harassed, extorted, and subjected to excessive use of force by police, than the general population. Risks are further magnified for LGBTI human rights defenders.

Patel also highlights the guide’s discussion of the role and duties of law enforcement during public demonstrations involving LGBTI persons.

‘We are pleased to see that the guide underlines the duty of law enforcement officers to take appropriate measures to ensure the protection of persons participating in LGBTI demonstrations, such as pride events,’ says Patel.  

Read the full report here.