WUNRN
http://www.wunrn.com
 
http://www.defendingwomen-defendingrights.org/contexualising.php
 


Contextualising the International Campaign on Women Human Rights Defenders

The Campaign

The International Campaign on Women Human Rights Defenders is an international initiative for the recognition and protection of women who are activists advocating for the realization of all human rights for all. The campaign asserts that women fighting for human rights and particularly focusing on women's human rights face specific violations in the course of their work because of their sex and gender. In addition, the Campaign focuses on the situation of human rights activists defending women’s rights and in particular calls attention to the violations experienced by lesbian, gay, bisxeual, transgender and other rights activists on grounds of their sex and gender identities. The identities of these actors as well as the nature of the rights they strive to uphold are both factors that make them the focus of the Campaign.

The Campaign aims to support the critical role played by human rights defenders all over the world in the promotion and protection of all human rights for all through expanding the ambit of understanding of this concept to include specific defenders and groups of defenders that are at risk because of their sex/gender identity. This has become all the more important in the present global context in which the space for human rights advocacy by civil society actors is shrinking in the context of the US-led 'wars' against terrorism and rising fundamentalisms.

The Campaign, which emerges out of a process of coalition building between women's rights organizations and human rights organizations, brings together a wide range of experiences and histories of defending human rights. It looks at issues of impunity and accountability of the State as well as accountability of a range of non-State actors for violations against women human rights defenders. It focuses on developing collective analytical and political strategies for strengthening the defense of women human rights defenders within a broader context of reaffirming internationally recognized commitments to democratic principles and universal human rights and freedoms.

The Campaign has identified four core calls:

  • Recognition of women human rights defenders;
  • Resistance to State violence;
  • Responsibility by non-State actors;
  • Realization of all human rights for all. 

The historical background:

History is replete with accounts of countless men and women worldwide who have been subjected to discrimination, abuse and violence in the course of their activism in advocating and defending their own rights as well as the rights of others. Many have paid with their lives for their courage and commitment to the defense of human rights, and yet their lives, and deaths, have often gone unrecognized. While it is true that existing legal structures can be drawn upon to protect individuals and groups of individuals from violations of their rights by states and by other specified actors, our experiences show that many activists do not enjoy the protection they are entitled to, by law. The demand for better legal frameworks and heightened social awareness for the protection and security of human rights defenders has emerged out of this context. 

Throughout the campaign, women human rights defenders have shared their concerns with the Campaign Team at a series of consultations and meetings. The information they have shared has led to a more nuanced understanding of the specific violations and abuses they face and the need to develop protection mechanisms that are responsive to the threats and risks they encounter as women human rights defenders.  The campaign has also brought women’s rights groups and human rights organisations to work together, through joint actions and activities, to address these concerns raised by women human rights defenders.  Together, they have responded to specific instances of abuse and violation of women human rights defenders through Action Alerts and other tools used by women’s human rights groups and human rights groups looking at violations against human rights defenders. The team has also been working collectively to draw attention to the lack of legitimacy given to women as human rights defenders, which accounts for the lack of protection accorded to them in their work.

The Declaration on Human Rights Defenders

In 1998, the UN General Assembly adopted the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders. This marks the first international recognition afforded to human rights defenders, and the first overt commitment by the international community and by the states that are members of the United Nations to the defense of the rights of those who strive to defend human rights. It is a document adopted by consensus and as such represents broad-based recognition of the importance to protect human rights defenders and promote their work. It does not create new rights, but speaks to the applicability of existing human rights norms and standards to the specific needs of human rights defenders. While the Declaration is not in itself a legally binding instrument, it contains a series of principles and rights that are based on human rights standards enshrined in other legally binding international instruments such as the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and International Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). Above and beyond its legal validity, the Declaration gives due recognition to the status of human rights defenders and reinforces the legitimacy of their work. It also lays out the basis on which human rights defenders can seek redress for the violations committed against them.

The creation of the position of Special Representative (SR) of the UN Secretary General on Human Rights Defenders in 1999 and the mandating of this SR to make an annual report to the UN Commission on Human Rights on the situation of human rights defenders worldwide further strengthened the discourse on human rights defenders and their needs for recognition and protection.

The Declaration and the mandate of the SR on HRDs refer broadly to the rights and responsibilities of states and other actors with regard to the recognition and protection of human rights defenders. While the language does not focus particularly on any specific group of defenders, it allows for the broadest possible interpretation of the term. In her reports to the UN Commission of Human Rights, Hina Jilani, the Pakistani human rights advocate who is presently the Special Representative of the UN Secretary General on the issue of Human Rights Defenders, has singled out the specific situation of women who are actively engaged in the defense of human rights.

Why a special focus on women human rights defenders?

Within the arena of human rights activism, winning recognition for women's rights as human rights was a hard won battle, fought on many fronts for many years. Challenging the assumption that the term 'human rights' was by definition applicable to all human beings equally, without consideration of the various differences that exist among human beings on the basis of race, ethnicity, economic or educational status, sex or gender identity, age or ability, and without consideration of the diverse relationships of power among and between human beings because of these differences was not an easy task in itself.

Within the patriarchal and male dominated social formations that exist all over the world, arguing for equality for women has been even more difficult. Women who speak out for their rights, for the rights of other women and for the rights of other communities that suffer from discrimination and marginalization, experience harassment, abuse and violence on a daily basis because of what they dare to do. 

Issues of women’s rights and, now, of women human rights defenders, are especially troublesome to states, non-state actors and even mainstream human rights organizations and progressive social movements because of the challenges posed to existing norms and social frameworks. Engendering human rights most critically entails giving life to the principle that the personal is political. The call for gender mainstreaming demands that we pay attention to unequal relations of power within all structures and organizational frameworks, including our own. 

The high ‘risk’ factor

Women human rights defenders in the course of their work experience human rights violations on multiple grounds. As human rights defenders, they face the same gamut of risks faced by all human rights defenders, when they challenge repressive state machinery, for example, or when they raise demands for freedom of opinion and expression from authoritarian states. As women they are also exposed to or targeted for gender-based violence and gender-specific risks. Recognition of the specific risks and the specific violations women face in their work in defense of human rights because of their sex or gender identity is crucial, especially in a broader context in which women's equality and dignity is denied and in which the violent suppression of women's autonomy and rights is endemic in every society.   

Women throughout the world who work for the protection and promotion not only of women’s rights, but also of human rights in general, are placed at risk by social norms and assumptions about women's primary role as being located within the private/domestic sphere. The isolation and silencing of women imposed by patriarchal structures play a critical role in making women more at risk to abuse and violations. Anyone who works with women and girls who are victims of domestic or sexual violence knows the many obstacles that prevent women from speaking out about the indignities and abuse they face on a daily basis. The culture of blaming the victims of sexual violence for their victimhood is a key factor that places constraints on women, and those around them, from reporting these abuses.  

Social norms and traditional and customary practices that construct women as symbols of family and community ‘honour’ also make women responsible for protecting their community’s honour and justify severe and inhuman punishments for women who transgress the boundaries of behaviour laid out and ascribed by male-dominated religious and cultural authorities. This makes it hard for women human rights defenders to report or even articulate the existence of violence against women committed by members of their own political or ethnic group.  Masculinist constructions of power, embedded in the State and reflected in families and communities, consider it unpatriotic and traitorous of women activists to point to perpetrators of violence from among members of the family or colleagues in the movements. Women who speak out and act in defense of their own rights as well as of the rights of other socially marginalized groups are rendered most at risk of attack and abuse. These interlocking networks of silence and ‘shame’ reinforce a culture of impunity for crimes against women. This in turn heightens the risk of women activists to violations of their rights and impedes their enjoyment of the full benefits of their citizenship.
 
Women and other activists who actively promote women's rights in arenas such as land rights, the right to inheritance, reproductive rights and sexual rights and who pose a challenge to tradition, culture and customary practices through their work are also often at the receiving end of a range of attacks and abuses. The manipulative use of culture, tradition, custom and religion by conservative and right-wing forces to justify human rights abuses of women makes the task of women human rights defenders working for the protection and promotion of women’s rights in these arenas most complex and difficult. Promoting and protecting rights located within these arenas can lead to additional risks for women activists, since the assertion of such rights is seen as disruptive of cultural values and traditions. Activism for women’s human rights that challenges patriarchal and hetero-normative social forms places women’s human rights defenders at risk, not only of physical abuse and violence but also makes them vulnerable to being ostracized by the community and society as a whole on allegations of being witches, apostates and heretics.

Of particular concern in the discussions on women human rights defenders is ‘sexuality-baiting’, a term broadly used to encompass a range of practices that manipulate attitudes and prejudices about women’s sexuality to intimidate, humiliate, embarrass, stifle or discourage women from organizing around, or addressing issues of sexuality, sexual and other human rights. Sexuality-baiting against women human rights defenders can take many forms: women activists are labeled lesbians, sexually promiscuous deviants, anti-God, anti-religion; they are accused of promoting ‘Western’ or ‘alien’ cultures, and seen as responsible for the break-up of families. These labels are meant to denigrate the importance of their work. It discredits women’s motives for engaging in human rights work.

In addition, sexuality-baiting gives rise to situations that often have grave consequences for women. Such consequences include dismissals or forced resignation from employment and from holding office, dispossession of home and children, expulsion from the community, forced exile or migration.  Women who demand accountability and criminalization of marital rape, for example, women who critique the patriarchal forms and nature of the monogamous nuclear family, or women who challenge heteronormativity – the imposition of the heterosexual norm – are often subject to attack and vilification, including criminal and religious penalties in some countries. Accusations of being ‘bad’ women and negligent mothers abound; comparable standards cannot be found for men engaged in public life and involved in the defense of human rights.   

Public attacks against women human rights defenders often result in imposing restrictions on their freedom of speech, expression and assembly, and in challenging the legal standing of their organizations. Sexuality is manipulated not only to attack lesbians, gays and other activists working on sexual rights, but also to discredit any other political agenda espoused by women’s activists. In many instances, confronted with these hostile and sometimes violent responses, activists themselves take a conscious decision to tone down their political agendas or, for example, not to take on sexuality-related rights abuses for fear of retribution. This type of self-censorship and internalization of fear becomes so ingrained that breaking the barriers of silence becomes difficult even when the political and social climates are more favourable for these issues to be raised.

Given this broad context, therefore, the term 'women human rights defenders' encompasses both women active in human rights defense who are targeted for who they are as well as all those active in the defense of women's rights who are targeted for what they do

What are the campaign calls?

Recognition of women human rights defenders

Despite the obstacles and suppression they face, throughout the world today women continue to be active in promoting and protecting human rights – their own and the rights of others. Their activism straddles a broad range of rights, including civil and political rights, economic, social and cultural rights, health rights, reproductive rights, sexual rights, labor rights, indigenous peoples’ rights, environmental rights and minority rights. Many women are also engaged in a range of anti-globalisation and anti-war activism that advances the rights of different communities and groups of people through working for social justice and sustainable peace, and for consultative forms of transparent and accountable governance that respect principles of equality and non-discrimination.

In addition to gender-specific violations inflicted on them as women, women human rights defenders have to also struggle against gendered and gender-based stereotypes that seek to invalidate their roles as leaders in the public sphere.  They are exposed to more hostility than their male colleagues because they defy cultural, religious or social stereotypes about femininity and the role and status of women in society. This is so particularly in situations where men are presumed to have the monopoly of knowledge. Women human rights defenders are also more likely to face personal attacks, stigmatisation and marginalisation on the basis of their personal lifestyles, for example, than men in comparable situations.

The focus of most mainstream human rights institutions and frameworks on the public arena and on state accountability is another factor that leads to a callous disregard of the role played by so-called private or non-state actors in committing women’s human rights abuses. Among the non-state actors engaged in the perpetration of human rights abuses are multinational corporations, private enterprises, armed or unarmed militant and extremist groups and individuals, especially those in an intimate or familial relationship with the women victims.

The issue of accountability of non-state actors for human rights violations they commit remains one of the most difficult within contemporary human rights discourse. For example, many minority, indigenous and ethnic communities face grave violations of their human rights at the hand of multi-national corporations who take over their land and forests, often employing private armed guards to provide ‘security’ to their enterprise. Armed groups propagating extremism often violate the human rights of civilian communities, and especially of women, brutally enforcing anti-democratic and inhuman practices in order to crush opposition and silence voices of dissent.  In all these situations, women are specifically targeted because of their sex and gender as well as because of their espousal of common and collective causes on behalf of minority, indigenous and ethnic communities.

The direct and indirect methods employed by patriarchal institutions and legal frameworks to control women human rights defenders are reinforced by the non-recognition of their work. This lack of recognition of women human rights defenders as defender in their own right directly challenges their legitimacy as leaders of communities and of social movements. Jeopardising the credibility of their work through non-recognition exposes women human rights defenders to further risks. For example, violations against women human rights defenders are given less priority when compared to those committed against ‘recognised’ human rights defenders who are often male. This is crucial especially in the context of women activists who work at the community level and have not achieved public recognition for their work; they are more likely to suffer human rights violations such as abduction or torture, without the public being aware of it.  At the same time, the political nature of the violations is also often lost as they are simply classified as common crimes. Further, these violations against women are subsumed within the ambit of ‘women abuse’ rather than perceived as acts of violence and affirmations of power. The struggle by women’s human rights defenders to assert that ‘rape’ is not a sexual act but rather an act of violence is but one example of the ways in which this type of stereotyping exists even within human rights movements.   

The risk faced by of women human rights defenders and activists is also increased because there is no systematic documentation of the gender-specific nature and manifestations of the violence against women human rights defenders.  This results in the denial of the specific concerns of women human rights defenders and in the persistent lacunae in legal frameworks and structures that can ensure them adequate and appropriate protection. This vulnerability in turn makes women human rights defenders more likely to be subjected to abuse and violations. More gender-sensitive processes of reporting and monitoring abuses against women have to be developed also to encourage the victims to report violations. For example, activists working in the area of violence against women have developed alternative methodologies for recording testimonies that can reduce the trauma for rape survivors recounting their stories; this process facilitates prosecution of abuses in a manner that does not further violate the rights of survivors of violence.  

In a context where women’s rights are not easily acknowledged and recognised as human rights, non-recognition of the specific roles of and risks faced by women human rights defenders translates into doubts regarding the validity of women-specific concerns within broader human rights frameworks, and into denial of the leadership and of the significant contributions made by women activists to human rights defense and work. Traditionally, within most mainstream human rights organizations and networks, as in many mainstream trade unions and political parties, raising specific issues of women’s rights was considered to be divisive. Women’s rights issues were subordinated to more ‘pressing’ issues, and advocacy for women’s rights could move onto the mainstream agenda only after other more important and ‘universal’ goals had been achieved.  This tendency not only serves to isolate women’s human rights but also results in the curtailment of the rights of women human rights defenders. For example, women activists who are forced to flee their countries due to imminent danger as a consequence of their activities in defense of human rights and women’s rights must often, if married, seek asylum and obtain refugee status as dependents of their spouses who are often also leaders of political and social movements.  There is insufficient recognition of the position of the woman in her own rights, as a human rights defender.

Through their activism over the years, women have transformed their traditional roles in the family, which provides the basis for much of their subordination and marginalization, into a source of agency that provides the basis for collective action and organization. For example, in many countries around the world, women have re-shaped the notion of motherhood in the face of severe political repression, challenged repressive machineries, both state and non-state, and demanded justice and accountability for human rights abuses of all. In Argentina, the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo constituted a significant pressure group demanding accountability for their ‘disappeared’ children during the military regime of the late 1970s.  The special expertise and knowledge garnered by women through the multiple roles and responsibilities they assume as care-givers must be can provide the basis for specific and often strategic interventions to improve protection for women human rights defenders.

Resistance to State Violence

The changing nature of the nation state in the latter part of the 20th century and the various political and military processes which paved the way for the formation of many new states has had a grave impact on the protection and promotion of human rights. In addition, the range of economic processes which are referred to by the term ‘globalisation’ has led to often traumatic transformation of societies and communities under so-called neo-liberal economic policies that focus on growth, privatisation of public services, and de-regulation of trade and finance. These processes have all created immense social tensions and competition for scarce resources within the poorest and most marginalized communities in the world.

This process is accompanied by a growth in the use of violence as a method of resolving conflict and has led to the proliferation of internal armed conflicts, separatist struggles and so-called ‘low intensity’ conflict as a global phenomenon. Insecure states rely more and more on the might of their militaries and security forces to ensure stability on all fronts. Militarism is inextricably linked to processes of militarization and the ‘normalization’ of military presence in civilian life and in decision-making structures. The global ‘War against Terrorism’ that followed the attacks on the World Trade Centre and Pentagon in the U.S.A. on September 11, 2002 has strengthened the hand of those who pursue militaristic resolutions of tensions and conflicts. Along with growing intolerance for diverse opinions and for dissent, one has observed the consistent threats to global governance posed by acts of unilateralism, the most blatant example of which was the decision of the government of the USA to attack Iraq in the face of wide opposition to such approach. Governments of many developing countries have had to accept the roles assigned to them in this ‘global war’ led by the USA, largely because aid and economic concessions are tied to their cooperation in this war.  

This context has legitimized steps taken by many governments to enact and implement a range of anti-terrorism laws that suppress democratic opposition and violate a range of human rights of the peoples they govern. Authoritarian regimes have been provided with an opportunity to hunt down their opponents with impunity. Advocacy for fundamental freedoms that check the excesses of governments and that demand democratic change are identified as a ‘threat to national and international security’.  This creates a climate of heightened risks for human rights defenders in general.  Human rights defenders, men and women, who work for democracy, social justice and human rights, face charges of ‘inciting to rebellion’, ‘disseminating false information’ and ‘damaging the countries reputation’ for reporting on the internal human rights situation at international events. The courts and legal proceedings are used to harass activists through multiple law suits, lengthy trials, exorbitant fines and bails, and prolonged detention. Governments have also enacted regulations that allow for monitoring and tight state control of the activities of civil society organizations such as, arbitrary registration procedures, restrictions on receiving funding from foreign sources, and mandatory reporting for non-resident NGO workers.
 
The report of the UN Special Representative on Human Rights Defenders for 2005 has made critical observations on this situation, pointing out reports she had received in which human rights defenders have been attacked even during peaceful public demonstrations and rallies, while conducting investigations of human rights abuses, and before, during or just after publicising human rights concerns. Among the abuses set out in the report are arbitrary arrest and detention, often without access to counsel and their families, intimidation and harassment by authorities including tapping or cutting telephone lines and confiscation of travel documents, prosecution for making critical statements against the government and blacklisting and threatening family members

The case of Mahboubeh Abbasgholizadeh, an Iranian feminist, arrested and questioned about her presentations at international meetings outside Iran, including at the European Social Forum and at the Asia Pacific NGO Forum on Beijing + 10 provides clear examples of the types and levels of abuse liable to be face by women human rights defenders when confronting state violations. She was repeatedly questioned about her sexual partners and was threatened that her daughter would be arrested if she did not cooperate. Amidst growing gay and lesbian organising in Zimbabwe, President Robert Mugabe similarly launched a series of verbal attacks against lesbians and gays, associating sexual diversity with national decline and justifying not only their marginalization but also any attacks against them.

A key line of defense of human rights defenders builds on the framework of state accountability and obligations as provided for in international human rights law. Activism for women’s human rights has shown that acts of violation and violence against women human rights defenders, perpetrated by the state, or by those who act in the name of and under the orders of the state, constitute a critical arena in which women human rights defenders must operate. The increasing dependence of many states, especially those  confronted by threats to their political stability, on private actors such as the business or corporate sector and private security operators somewhat clouds the reality of state accountability for these violations. In Thailand and the Philippines, there are many examples of private sector enterprises using private security forces to fire at, intimidate and sometimes assassinate people from the communities who protest against their displacement and against environmental consequences of the operations of these companies.

The issue of state violence and violations of the rights of human rights defenders becomes more complex if one considers the positive obligation imposed on the State to promote, protect and fulfil human rights under international human rights treaties and commitments.  The duty of State and authorities created by the state to prevent, investigate and punish wrongful acts, including those committed by non-State actors, has been strengthened by a growing focus on the responsibility of the State for its omissions, including its failure to prevent human rights violations from taking place and to protect the rights of those living under its jurisdiction.

Responsibility for violations by non-State actors

As described above, the concept of ‘Non-state actors’ could include members of the family and community, members of extremist and fundamentalist groups, armed groups, representatives of the media, and others such as trans-national corporations and international financial institutions. The distinction between State and non-state actors can be sometimes superficial, both in the context of identifying the perpetuators and attributing responsibilities for the abuses.  For example, paramilitary groups which are categorised as ‘non-State’ actors can turn out to be supported by governments in some instances, such as in situations of counter-insurgency operations. Also, while human rights abuses may be committed directly by ‘non-State’ actors, both the non-State actors and the State may be held responsible for the violations. The emergence of very powerful non-State actors such as fundamentalist armed groups assimilated in popular movements and the rise in conflicts and human rights crises that cut across national jurisdictions demonstrate the limits of a paradigm of accountability for human rights violations centered on national sovereignty. 

The term ‘non-State actors’ is important not so much for its conceptual clarity but more because it marks a significant shift in the accountability of such perpetrators of human rights violations under international human rights law. Prior to the 1990s,  the assertion that only states are signatories to international treaties and can therefore be made subjects of international human rights law, had led to impunity of non-State actors who committed human rights abuses. The traditional focus of human rights activism on State accountability partly explains why issues of violence against women had been eclipsed in international human rights law and had been considered outside the mandate of governments and human rights organizations until the 1990s.

For example, in the case of violence against women and defenders of women’s rights in Algeria throughout the 1980’s and 90’s, most violations committed by the State affected men, while, for the most part, violations committed by fundamentalist armed groups affected several hundred thousand women and defenders of women’s rights. The concentration on State violations to the detriment of identifying non-State actors’ violence rendered women and the specific forms of violence against them and their defenders invisible. At the same time, fundamentalist groups have also proceeded to use the opportunity offered by human rights discourse to be seen and represented as victims in all possible instances and to claim rights that were denied to those who were their victims. They became acceptable partners and speakers on human rights platforms, enjoying impunity and erasing their roles as perpetrators of violence and human rights abuse. An outrageous outcome of this situation is that non-State political actors have enjoyed refugee status in European capital cities while their victims were not considered eligible since they were not persecuted by the State.  For the victims and women human rights defenders who are not even being recognized as defenders entitled to rights, this has added offense to injury.

Insisting on the responsibility by non-State actors for human rights violations is crucial for the protection of women human rights defenders. The ways in which women and their bodies have been used as markers of culture and tradition by religious fundamentalist groups, extremist nationalist movements and separatist groups fighting for self-determination is well documented. Women activists advocating women’s rights are exposed to violence not only from external actors (the ‘enemies’ who wrench retaliation from the communities of the ‘other’), but also from internal actors because in the course of their advocacy for women’s rights, they oppose oppressive cultural practices and traditions often valorized by these groups. In addition, women human rights defenders who work in situations of violence and armed conflict, for example, face specific forms of violence including war crimes and crimes against humanity. During periods of transition and in post-conflict situations they face heightened risks, when public violence turns private, and it is generally perceived that violence no longer exists in this context.

Realization of all human rights for all

The best protection for women human rights defenders and the prevention of violations and abuses committed against them is the realization of all human rights for all.  Human rights defenders, both men and women, are most at risk in a climate of growing political repression, increasing authoritarianism and rising militarization perpetrated by the state and its allies.  Many governments have reneged on their commitments under international human rights treaties. State and non-state actors have continued to commit human rights violations with impunity.  These have made human rights work more dangerous for activists.  So there is a need now, more than ever, to demand for the fulfillment of all human rights and find effective ways to make state and non-state actors both directly accountable for human rights violations.

Within the advocacy for the realization of human rights, the struggle for winning recognition for concepts of rights in the areas of biological/human reproduction and the exercise of sexual choices has been continuous and contentious. The outcomes documents of the International Conference on Population and Development (Cairo, 1994) and the Fourth World Conference on Women (Beijing, 1995)  contain language that signaled a shift away from consideration of these issues as public health concerns to an acceptance of the legitimacy of these rights in the context of non-discrimination and women’s autonomy. Yet these gains have been blocked and resisted at every turn by the combined forces of conservatism and extremism as well as religious fundamentalisms. In addition, ensuring that interpretations of these rights in ways that advance women’s agency are incorporated into policies and laws remains contentious.

Policy makers including those in the mainstream human rights field have yet to become fully cognizant of the multi-dimensional facets of reproductive rights to include women’s autonomy to decide whether, when and how to reproduce, including the right to contraceptives, safe abortion, and women’s capacity to have a satisfying and safe sex life, based on choice and consent.  Human rights for women include this range of reproductive and sexual rights. The present yardstick remains the statement in Paragraph 96 of Beijing Platform for Action which reads:

The human rights of women include their right to have control over and decide freely and responsibly on matters related to their sexuality, including sexual and reproductive health, free of coercion, discrimination and violence.  Equal relationships between women and men in matters of sexual relations and reproduction, including full respect for the integrity of the person, require mutual respect, consent and shared responsibility for sexual behavior and its consequences.

The criminalizing of homosexuality in many countries and the endemic marginalization of all groups and communities of women, and men, who exercise sexual choice and preferences in contradiction to hetero-normative standards make the espousal of sexual rights extremely difficult. The lack of social legitimacy is also linked to the lack of legitimacy accorded to sexual rights and reproductive rights within traditional human rights organizations and networks. The perpetuation of invisibility not only of sexual rights issues but of gay, lesbian and other sexualities in all spheres including in broad social movements, is itself a major form of discrimination and violation of sexual rights.

The centrality of the advocacy for sexuality rights becomes more urgent with the rise of various forms of fundamentalisms, which have become powerful forces responsible for many violations of women’s rights and human rights.  Fundamentalisms, as political projects that use religion to obtain and retain power, draw their legitimacy from a fabricated notion of ‘moral universalism’ that works to create a single, collective identity that is deemed as ‘pure’, ‘valid’ or ‘authentic’. This ‘purity’ or ‘authenticity’ is achieved primarily through the control over women including over their sexuality. As fundamentalist ideologies gain power in societies, elements of these ideologies also begin to influence processes of law-making and policy-making. A glaring example is the ‘Global Gag Rule’ (or Mexico City Policy) reinstated by the Bush administration that restricts funds for NGOs that work on any abortion-related issues, including advocacy for legal reform of punitive abortion laws, and the later policy that provides HIV/AIDS funding only for those organizations and groups that encourage the pro-abstinence ABC (Abstain, Be faithful, use a Condom) method.

Recommendations

The international campaign on women human rights defenders intends to begin a process of mobilization and reflection among key players in the human rights arena on matters affecting women human rights defenders, and to support the many and varied initiatives designed to deepen the understanding of human rights and push for universal application of human rights principles, especially in the current global context.  

Specifically, the campaign aspires to generate interest and support from the international community to work towards achieving the following major propositions:

  1. Women human rights defenders are treated as equal partners and leaders in the defense and promotion of human rights.

    This goal is rooted in the commitment to fulfill the universal human rights principle of equality between men and women, based on the feminist understanding of substantive equality that challenges and seeks to correct the curtailment of women’s rights based on the biased stereotypes around the different biological functions of men and women.

  2. Women human rights defenders are recognized and protected from discrimination and violations

    Many of the risks faced by women human rights defenders arise out of the lack of acknowledgement of their presence in the field and of the lack of legitimacy accorded to the issues they advocate. The lack of respect for women human rights defenders would eventually lead to adverse impact on the overall advocacy for human rights.

  3. Governments, NGOs and other members of civil society address the specific concerns of women human rights defenders and protect them in accordance with the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders, and other international instruments and mechanisms.

    Adequate and appropriate protection for women human rights defenders entails an understanding of gender-based forms of human rights violations, threats and their consequences on women human rights defenders. Addressing these violations have to be contextualized, and mechanisms for protection must affirm the principles of equality and non-discrimination. The use of culture or religion to justify abuses against women should be prohibited, and women activists must be protected in all spheres of their work, in both the ‘private’ and ‘public’ arenas, with both State and non-State actors assuming direct liability for their respective violations of human rights. 

 

In order to ensure the protection of women human rights defenders based on these key propositions, the campaign makes the following demands:

For governments:

  • To repeal of all laws and policies, including anti-terrorism regulations, that violate human and women’s rights and pose risks to human rights defenders, including women and Enact specific measures to implement the principles contained in the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders that would recognize and protect women human rights defenders and ensure women are equally able to exercise the right to defend human rights and all the other rights;
  • To take effective action to sanction state officials and non-state actors who abuse the criminal justice system, utilize the media or community to harass women human rights defenders or curtail their legitimate activities for the defence of human rights and fundamental freedoms;
  • To ensure allocation of adequate funding and resources for the full protection of women human rights defenders and the promotion of their rights.

For the UN and human rights groups:

  • To develop new mechanisms for more effective accountability of non-State actors for violations against women and women human rights defenders.
  • To continue to support the mandate of the UN Special Representative to the Secretary General on Human Rights Defenders, and ensure that a focus on women human rights defenders remains a core aspect of that person’s work in order to develop and maintain effective, appropriate and accessible protection for women human rights defenders.
  • the office of the UN High Commissioner on Human Rights to provide technical support and resources to relevant UN and state agencies, including national human rights commissions, to implement the recommendations of the UN Special Representative on Human Rights Defenders, particularly on the prevention of violations and protection of women human rights defenders. 
  • To develop gender-specific guidelines to enable women human rights defenders who are exposed to danger to access protection or reach safety before serious or further violence has occurred such as:  exhaustive and impartial investigations are conducted into violations against human rights defenders, including women and that those responsible are brought to justice and the victims or their relatives provided with redress and reparation. Ensure women human rights defenders have equal access to the law and that judicial investigations and proceedings against them are conducted in accordance with international fair trial standards.


For human rights organizations, civil society movements and NGOs:

  • To undertake measures to protect those who are persecuted because of their advocacy on sexual rights and eliminate all forms of discrimination against persons of different sexual orientation, including lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons.
  • To develop programs and allocate sufficient resources for the protection of women human rights defenders and to respond to gender-based violations against them.
  • To recognize that women human rights defenders are human rights defenders in their own right and that they should be consulted on issues relating to their security and protection as human rights defenders.




================================================================
To leave the list, send your request by email to: wunrn_listserve-request@lists.wunrn.com. Thank you.