WUNRN

http://www.wunrn.com

 

WOMEN & HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTIONS – SERIOUS LETTER TO WORLD BANK FROM UN EXPERTS – WORLD BANK SHOULD RECOGNIZE/PROTECT HUMAN RIGHTS IN SOCIAL POLICIES +

 

The World Bank has enormous power to impact international financial policies. We as women often see the results of major World Bank loans to countries in required social austerity as in education, health, food and water. Though the public words of the World Bank may seem supportive of human rights, the specific language in the documents may, indeed, not provide human rights safety nets and guards against further poverty and provisions for social protections. We know that there is the challenge to: Follow the Power, Follow the Profit - Look for Women & Human Rights!!

 

Direct Link to the Full 17-Page December 12 Serious Letter of UN Special Rapporteurs and Independent Experts to the President of the World Bank.

It is quite exceptional to have so many highly esteemed UN Experts join in such a major policy Statement.

http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/EPoverty/WorldBank.pdf

 

List of UN Experts Signing on to This Highly Significant Letter to the World Bank:

 

The experts: Philip Alston, Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights; Michael K. Addo, Chair-Rapporteur of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises; Patricia Arias, Chair-Rapporteur of the Working Group on the use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding the exercise of the right of peoples to self-determination; Urmila Bhoola, Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of slavery, including its causes and consequences; Heiner Bielefeldt, Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief; Keita Bocoum, Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Central African Republic; Juan Pablo Bohoslavsky, Independent Expert on the effects of foreign debt and other related international financial obligations of States on the full enjoyment of all human rights, particularly economic, social and cultural rights; Maud De Boer-Buquicchio, Special Rapporteur on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography; Virginia Dandan, Independent Expert on human rights and international solidarity; Hilal Elver, Special Rapporteur on the right to food; Mireille Fanon Mendes-France, Chair-Rapporteur of the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent; Leilani Farha, Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living, and on the right to non-discrimination in this context; Michel Forst, Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders; Léo Heller, Special Rapporteur on the human right to safe drinking water and sanitation; Rita Izsák, Special Rapporteur on minority issues; David Kaye, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression; Maina Kiai, Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association; Gabriela Knaul, Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers; John Knox, Independent Expert on the issue of human rights obligations relating to the enjoyment of a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment; Yanghee Lee, Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar; Rashida Manjoo, Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences; Bahame Nyanduga, Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Somalia; Dainius Pûras, Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health; Frances Raday, Chair-Rapporteur of the Working Group on the issue of discrimination against women in law and in practice; Surya Prasad Subedi, Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Cambodia; Victoria Lucia Tauli-Corpuz, Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples; Baskut Tuncak, Special Rapporteur on the implications for human rights of the environmentally sound management and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes; Alfred de Zayas, Independent expert on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

 

“Rather than seeing human rights as a means by which to facilitate the participation and empowerment of the beneficiaries of development, the Bank’s proposed new Safeguards seem to view human rights in largely negative terms, as considerations that, if taken seriously, will only drive up the cost of lending rather than contributing to ensuring a positive outcome. While a 2010 report by the Bank’s Independent Evaluation Group (“IEG”) concluded that the benefits of Safeguards outweigh their costs,12 the approach in the draft Safeguards seems to be driven by the desire to privilege rapid approval of loans over all else, an orientation which has long been identified as a problem for the Bank.13 A sense of being increasingly in competition with other lenders to secure the ‘business’ of developing country borrowers seems to be at the root of this approach.14 The Bank has defended its increased reluctance to engage with human rights on the basis that alternative sources of development financing are emerging, which do not require meaningful Safeguards, thus providing the latter with a significant advantage over the Bank. In our view, the failure of other lenders to require that projects they fund should respect human rights standards is not a valid reason for the World Bank to follow suit. We believe that the problems that will flow from such a race to the bottom are already becoming apparent, and it will be for us, in different contexts, to make this clear to the relevant lenders.”

 

“Human rights are not merely a matter of sound policy, but of legal obligation. As an international organization with international legal personality, and as a UN specialized agency, the Bank is bound by obligations stemming not only from its Articles of Agreement, but also from human rights obligations arising under ‘general rules of international law’15 and the UN Charter. Moreover, each of the 188 Member States of the World Bank has ratified at least one (and, in almost all cases, several) of the core international human rights treaties.16 Those States are also bound by human rights obligations stemming from other sources of international law. It is widely recognized that Member States should take their international human rights obligations into account when acting through an international organization such as the World Bank.17 States that borrow from the Bank also continue to be bound by their own international human rights obligations in the context of Bank-financed development projects and the Bank has a due diligence responsibility not to facilitate the violations of their human rights obligations, or to otherwise become complicit in such violations.”

 

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

World Bank Should Recognize Importance of Human Rights in Its New Environmental and Social Policies



GENEVA (17 December 2014) – The United Nations Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, Philip Alston, today urged the World Bank to recognize the central importance of human rights to its draft environmental and social policies, also known as Safeguard policies, which apply to its investment project financing. The draft Safeguards policies were released by the Bank in July for public consultation, as part of the multi-stage review.

“The draft Safeguards seem to go out of their way to avoid any meaningful references to human rights,” Mr. Alston stressed, in a joint letter* to World Bank president Jim Yong Kim, together with a group of twenty-seven other independent experts of the largest fact-finding and monitoring mechanism of the UN human rights system.

“The Bank’s position is effectively a sleight of hand,” he noted. “They insist that their operations will be ‘supportive of human rights’ but then add that this must be ‘in a manner consistent with the Bank’s Articles of Agreement,’ and they have interpreted the latter as preventing human rights being taken into account because they are inherently political.”

According to the UN Special Rapporteur, Bank officials have defended its increased reluctance to engage with human rights on the basis that alternative sources of development financing are emerging, which do not require meaningful safeguards.

“The failure of other lenders to require that projects they fund should protect human rights standards is not a valid reason for the Bank to follow suit,” the expert said.
“The risk of a race to the bottom is real and would be disastrous for sustainable development.”
 
The World Bank’s president has repeatedly promised that the revision process will not result in a dilution of the Safeguards. “I believe that honouring this promise requires a significantly different approach from that which is now being pursued by the Bank. The draft is a backward step that tramples upon the progress achieved over the last thirty years or so,” Mr. Alston warned.

In their joint letter, the UN experts also highlighted a range of specific concerns with the proposed new Safeguards policies. They signaled that the move away from a requirements-based Safeguards system to an aspirational one represents a clear dilution of existing protections, as does the significant delegation of responsibilities from the Bank to other actors.

The draft Safeguards also fail to meet the standards that international human rights law sets, for instance in the area of labor and working conditions, involuntary resettlement and indigenous peoples, the experts noted. In addition, many vulnerable groups, such as LGBTI and people with a physical or mental disability, remain virtually unprotected in Bank projects.    

 

 

WUNRN

http://www.wunrn.com

 

http://www.ipsnews.net/2014/07/world-bank-board-declines-to-revise-controversial-draft-policies/

 

World Bank Board Declines to Revise Controversial Draft Policies - July 31, 2014

_________________________________________________________________________

 

http://www.inclusivedevelopment.net/world-bank-turns-its-back-on-rights-protections-for-the-poor-global-civil-society-response-gathers-momentum/

Inclusive Development International - An independent, non-profit association working to make global development more just and inclusive, advancing a human rights approach to development through research and advocacy.IDI supports people on the periphery to claim their rights in the centers of political and economic power. 

WORLD BANK DILUTES HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTIONS ON PROJECTS IT FINANCES

 

World Bank Opts Out of Safeguards on Land Rights, & Prevention of Impoverishment, Displacement, & Environmental Damage

 

Civil Society Voice, Including Women, Gathers Momentum

 

(New York, London, New Delhi, July 29, 2014) – Civil society organisations around the world are decrying a leaked draft of the World Bank’s proposed new policies to avoid harmful impacts from the development projects that it finances. Despite earlier commitments by Bank President Jim Yong Kim that the policies would not be diluted and that safeguards on land rights would be strengthened, the proposed changes have gutted essential requirements that are necessary to prevent displacement, impoverishment, and environmental damage. The draft policies are up for discussion by the Bank’s board on July 30 ahead of public consultations.

The Joint NGO & Civil Society Statement is available here.

The leaked World Bank draft safeguards framework is available here.

“This draft effectively winds back the clock to the 1970s, before the Bank had binding policies in place to protect the poor and the environment. We see nothing more than a naked attempt by the Bank to shield itself from accountability for the destructive impacts of the mega-projects it is planning.” said Madhuresh Kumar, National Organizer of the National Alliance of People’s Movements in India.

Most shockingly, the draft policies provide an opt-out option for governments that do not wish to provide essential land and natural resource rights protections to Indigenous Peoples.

Joji Carino, Director of the Forest Peoples Programme, said “we have engaged with social and environmental safeguard development with the World Bank for over twenty years and have never seen a proposal with potential for such widespread negative impacts for indigenous peoples around the world. The proposed ‘opt-out’ for protections for indigenous peoples, in particular, would undermine existing international human rights law and the significant advances seen in respect for indigenous peoples rights in national laws.”

The draft also weakens protections for people who will be evicted from their homes, land and livelihoods, increasing the risk that Bank-financed projects will impoverish people, exacerbate inequality and cause human rights violations. The proposal scraps critical rules that have been in place for thirty years requiring the Bank to take concerted measures to avoid and minimise displacement and for resettlement action plans capable of restoring the livelihoods of the displaced to be in place before committing funds to projects. It provides multiple opportunities for borrower governments, or even private “intermediary” banks, to use their own standards for impact assessment, compensation and resettlement, without clear criteria on when and how this would be acceptable.

Theodore Downing, President of the International Network on Displacement and Resettlement, a 14-year old network of involuntary resettlement professionals, said “the proposed changes eviscerate existing international standards – knowingly placing millions of people at risks of impoverishment.”

“The Bank is trying to exonerate itself from all responsibility for the devastating effects of the displacement it finances, while giving private equity funds and some of the world’s most abusive governments unfettered discretion to uproot the poor as they fit,” said David Pred, Managing Director of Inclusive Development International.

Land titling projects are exempted from the coverage of the draft resettlement policy. This will leave affected communities completely unprotected from forced eviction by their government, as happened in the case of Cambodia’s Boeung Kak Lake community whose homes were demolished after they were deemed not to have ownership rights under a Bank-titling project.

“If this policy is adopted, many communities around the world will be forcibly evicted like mine was, and they will not be able to seek any recourse from the Bank,” said Tep Vanny, a community leader from Boeung Kak Lake. After filing a complaint with the World Bank’s Inspection Panel about the controversial project, Tep Vanny and local organisations finally secured title for hundreds of families that were previously threatened with eviction. With the proposed changes to the Bank’s policy, that would not have been possible.

Despite the growing land-grabbing crisis displacing countless indigenous communities, small farmers, fisher-folk and pastoralists throughout the global south, the draft policy fails to incorporate any serious protections to prevent Bank funds from supporting land-grabs.

“In Ethiopia, World Bank funds have been used to facilitate one the world’s biggest land grabs, with the indigenous populations of entire regions being uprooted to make way for agro-industrial investments. We had hoped that the new safeguards would include strong requirements to prevent governments like Ethiopia from abusing its people with Bank funds, but we are shocked to see the Bank instead opening the flood-gates for more abuses,” said Obang Metho, Executive Director of the Solidarity Movement for a New Ethiopia.

“Not only is the current draft an unconscionable weakening, it is a complete misrepresentation of two years of consultations with civil society.   The Bank’s Board must not endorse this draft, and at a minimum must insist that these fundamental loopholes be addressed before the next round of consultations,” said Sasanka Thilakasiri, Policy Advisor for Oxfam International.

99 non-governmental organizations and civil society networks and 17 distinguished individuals from Asia-Pacific, Africa, Latin America, North America and Europe sent a statement to the World Bank’s Board yesterday, demanding that the draft be sent back to the drawing board and re-written with serious safeguards to respect and protect the land, housing and livelihood rights of the poor.