Nepal’s Deadly Flash Floods: What Went Wrong?

Posted on by admin

Asia-Pacific, Climate Change, Conferences, COP29, Editors’ Choice, Environment, Featured, Headlines, Natural Resources, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

COP29

Kathmandu under water because of heavy rainfall, which claimed more than 225 lives in last week of September. Photo: Barsha Shah/IPS

Kathmandu under water because of heavy rainfall, which claimed more than 225 lives in last week of September. Photo: Barsha Shah/IPS

KATHMANDU, Oct 3 2024 (IPS) – Nepal is trying to recover from recent flash floods and landslides caused by heavy rainfall over the last weekend of September, which claimed at least 226 lives. The mid- and eastern parts of the country, including the capital, Kathmandu, experienced the heaviest monsoon rains in two decades from September 26-28, leaving many parts of Kathmandu underwater. Experts say this is one of the deadliest and worst flash floods that impacted thousands of people in decades.

The National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Authority (NDRRMA)—facing intense backlash for its inability to act effectively to minimize losses—reported by Tuesday (October 1) that at least 25 people were still stranded or missing, while more than 150 were injured.

On September 28, the country’s 25 weather stations in 14 districts recorded new precipitation records within 24-hours. Kathmandu airport stations recorded 239.7 millimeters of rain. Before that, on July 23, 2002, it had recorded 177 mm of rainfall. Flash floods caused by extreme rainfall within a short period washed away entire neighborhoods, roads, and bridges in Kathmandu and surrounding areas.

The heavy rains caused rivers in Kathmandu, including the Bagmati, which runs through the city, to swell more than 2 meters above the safe level. Senior journalist Yubaraj Ghimire—whose house was also submerged—wrote, “The disastrous hours of terror further confirmed the state’s incompetence in times of need.”

Outside of Kathmandu villages like Roshi in Kavre district are impacted by flood and landslides. Photo: Barsha Shah/IPS

Outside of Kathmandu villages like Roshi in Kavre district are impacted by flood and landslides. Photo: Barsha Shah/IPS

Early warnings were there, but lives were lost!

Frustration is growing, not only because of its failure in conducting effective rescue operations but also for not acting on the information that was available beforehand about the forthcoming disaster.

The Department of Hydrology and Meteorology (DHM) issued a special weather bulletin at least five days prior, alerting the public to impending heavy rainfall that could result in flooding and landslides.

In the bulletin, the DHM labeled districts with red, orange, yellow, and green, urging “Take Action,” “Be Prepared,” “Be Updated,” and “No Warning,” respectively.

Again, on September 25, the DHM issued another “special weather bulletin,” this time labeling most parts of the country in red, or the “Take Action” category.

As predicted, heavy rain started pouring—rivers began flowing with water levels higher than the safe limit.

“The information was there, but it doesn’t seem like it was taken seriously to be prepared,” Dr. Ngamindra Dahal, who works on climate change-induced disaster risk reduction, said. “To minimize consequences, we need to take action according to the information we have, but that was not the case in most parts.”

Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli acknowledged that the government was not prepared for a disaster of this scale. In a press conference on Tuesday, Oli said, “Our preparedness was not for this kind of circumstance. We were not expecting this scale of rains, landslides, and human and infrastructure losses.”

But the weather agency, DHM, had been warning and urging appropriate action through multiple notices. Government agencies admit they were not able to communicate disaster-related information effectively.

Why was NDRRMA not able to act quickly?

This time, the weather information was accurate in most parts, but avoidable incidents still claimed lives.

“I was traveling, and what I can say is that even though there was information beforehand, it was not transformed into action,” Dahal added. “I do think NDRRMA and other stakeholders could have done better to reduce casualties.”

But the agency responsible for disaster risk reduction and management—NDRRMA—claims that it was due to their collaborative effort with other stakeholders that human casualties were lower.

“That information did help, and it is because of us that things are not worse than this,” Dr. Dijan Bhattrai, spokesperson for NDRRMA, said.

“In the case of Kathmandu, our urban setting is not capable of handling this kind of disaster, and in other parts of the country, it was a combination of intense rain and fragmented geological conditions due to the 2015 earthquake.”

Stakeholders have publicly acknowledged the role of river encroachment and unplanned settlement in Kathmandu, and this problem is well-known. However, for this recent disaster, people are angry because they noticed a clear gap between the information and the preparedness effort.

“It’s true we were not well-equipped to deal with this kind of situation in terms of resources and trained manpower,” Bhattrai claimed. “We did our part, doing what we could within our capacity.”

Is it exacerbated by climate change?

In recent years, scientists have said that climate change is altering the amount and timing of rainfall across Asia. However, the impact of floods has increased due to the built environment, including unplanned construction, especially on floodplains, which leaves insufficient areas for water retention and drainage.

A recent report published in Nature Communications states that Asia’s exposure to extreme rain and flood risk will grow by 2030.

“Definitely, there is much to do in terms of effective disaster communication and actionable preparedness, but it is also a fact that these kinds of events are becoming more frequent because of climate change,” Bhattrai said. “We are planning to lay our case at the upcoming UN climate conference (COP29) to secure more resources to deal with future disasters.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Activists Call on World to ‘Imagine’ Peace, End Nuclear Arms

Posted on by admin

Active Citizens, Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, Conferences, Editors’ Choice, Featured, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, Humanitarian Emergencies, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, Nuclear Disarmament, Peace, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Peace

The panel for the session on “Remembering Hiroshima and Nagasaki: Imagining a World without Nuclear Weapons.” Credit: AD McKenzie/IPS

The panel for the session on “Remembering Hiroshima and Nagasaki: Imagining a World without Nuclear Weapons.” Credit: AD McKenzie/IPS

PARIS, Sep 27 2024 (IPS) – In any discussion of world peace and the future of humanity, the issue of nuclear arms must be addressed, and now.

That was the message from a range of delegates at the “Imaginer la Paix / Imagine Peace” conference, held in Paris September 22 to 24, and organized by the Sant’Egidio Community, a Christian organization founded in Rome in 1968 and now based in 70 countries.

Describing its tenets as “Prayer, service to the Poor and work for Peace,” the community has hosted 38 international, multi-faith peace meetings, bringing together activists from around the world. This is the first time the conference has been held in Paris, with hundreds traveling to France, itself a nuclear-weapon state.

Occurring against the backdrop of brutal, on-going conflicts in different regions and a new race by some countries to “upgrade” their arsenal, the gathering had a sense of urgency, with growing fears that nuclear weapons might be used by warlords. Participants highlighted current and past atrocities and called upon world leaders to learn from the past.

“After Hiroshima and Nagasaki, we have been blessed with many who have said ‘no’—’no’ a million times, creating movements and treaties, (and) awareness… that the only reasonable insight to learn from the conception and use of nuclear weapons is to say ‘no’,” said Andrea Bartoli, president of the Sant’Egidio Foundation for Peace and Dialogue, based in New York.

Participating in a conference forum Monday titled “Remembering Hiroshima and Nagasaki: Imagining a World Without Nuclear Weapons,”  Bartoli and other speakers drew stark pictures of what living in a world with nuclear weapons entails, and they highlighted developments since World War II.

“After the two bombs were used against Hiroshima and Nagasaki, humans built more than 70,000 nuclear weapons and performed more than 2,000 tests. Still today we have more than 12,500, each of them with power greatly superior to the two used in August 1945,” Bartoli said.

Despite awareness of the catastrophic potential of these weapons and despite a UN treaty prohibiting their use, some governments argue that possessing nuclear arms is a deterrent—an argument that is deceptive, according to the forum speakers.

Anna Ikeda, program coordinator tor disarmament at the UN Office of Soka Gakkai International. Credit: AD McKenzie/IPS

Anna Ikeda, program coordinator for disarmament at the UN Office of Soka Gakkai International. Credit: AD McKenzie/IPS

Jean-Marie Collin, director of ICAN (the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, a movement launched in the early 2000s in Australia and recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize in 2017), said that leaders who cite deterrence “accept the possibility of violating” international human rights.

“Nuclear weapons are designed to destroy cities and kill and maim entire populations, which means that all presidents and heads of government who implement a defense policy based on nuclear deterrence and who are therefore responsible for giving this order, are aware of this,” Collin told the forum.

ICAN campaigned for the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons that was adopted at the United Nations in 2017, entering into force in 2021. The adoption came nearly five decades after the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), which entered into force in 1970.

The terms of the NPT consider five countries to be nuclear weapons states: the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France, and China. Four other countries also possess nuclear weapons: India, Pakistan, North Korea, and Israel.

According to a 2024 ICAN report, these nine states jointly spent €85 billion (USD 94,6 billion) on their atomic weapon arsenals last year, an expenditure ICAN has called “obscene” and “unacceptable.” France, whose president Emmanuel Macron spoke about peace in broad, general terms at the opening of the conference, spent around €5,3 billion (about USD 5,9 billion) in 2023 on its nuclear weapons, said the report.

The policy of “deterrence” and “reciprocity,”  which essentially means “we’ll get rid of our weapons if you get rid of yours,”  has been slammed by ICAN and fellow disarmament activists.

“With the constant flow of information, we often tend to lose sight of the reality of figures,” Collin said at the peace conference. “I hope this one will hold your attention: it is estimated that more than 38,000 children were killed in the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Children!”

All those killed—an estimated 210,000 people by the end of 1945—died in horrific ways, as survivors and others have testified. Delegates said that this knowledge should be the real “deterrent.”

At the forum, Anna Ikeda, program coordinator for disarmament at the UN Office of Soka Gakkai International, a global Buddhist movement, described testimony from a Hiroshima a-bomb survivor, Reiko Yamada, as one she would never forget.

“She (Yamada) stated, ‘A good friend of mine in the neighbourhood was waiting for her mother to return home with her four brothers and sisters. Later, she told me that on the second day after the bombing, a moving black lump crawled into the house. They first thought it was a black dog, but they soon realized it was their mother; she collapsed and died when she finally got to her children. They cremated her body in the yard,” Ikeda told the audience with emotion.

“Who deserves to die such a death? Nobody!” she continued. “Yet our world continues to spend billions of dollars to upkeep our nuclear arsenals, and our leaders at times imply readiness to use them. It is utterly unacceptable.”

Ikeda said that survivors, known as the “hibakusha” in Japan, have a fundamental answer to why nuclear weapons must be abolished—it is that “no one else should ever suffer what we did.”

Note: This article is brought to you by IPS Noram in collaboration with INPS Japan and Soka Gakkai International in consultative status with ECOSOC.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

‘We Need Competitive Elections so Only Truly Committed States Are Elected to the UN Human Rights Council’

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Conferences, Featured, Global, Headlines, Human Rights, TerraViva United Nations

Sep 26 2024 (IPS) –  
CIVICUS discusses the upcoming election of new members of the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Council with Madeleine Sinclair, New York Office Director and Legal Counsel at the International Service for Human Rights (ISHR).

The Human Rights Council plays a crucial role in addressing global human rights issues and serves as a platform for activists and victims of violations. Its 47 members represent different regional groups. In October, 19 states will stand for 18 seats, with the Asia-Pacific region the only group with more candidates than seats. Many of the candidates have poor human rights records, and one – Saudi Arabia – stands out for its extremely serious rights violations. Civil society calls on UN member states to reject Saudi Arabia’s candidacy and uphold human rights standards when selecting members of the UN’s top human rights body.

Madeleine Sinclair

Why is the election of UN Human Rights Council members important?

As happens every year, the Human Rights Council will soon renew one third of its membership through a secret ballot election. On 9 October, all 193 members of the UN General Assembly will vote for the 18 members who will sit on the UN’s main human rights body from 2025 to 2027.

Elections should provide an opportunity to elect candidates with a strong human rights record. According to the Council’s membership criteria, candidate states should demonstrate a genuine commitment to the promotion and protection of human rights through domestic and international action. They should also demonstrate a willingness to address emerging challenges and crises to ensure the Council’s effectiveness.

How competitive will this year’s election be?

Unfortunately, this election will be nowhere near as competitive as it should be, with only 19 countries standing for 18 seats. These seats are divided among the UN’s five official regional groups, each of which presents its own slate of candidates. But only the Asia-Pacific slate is competitive, with six candidates vying for five seats, while the other four slates are closed, meaning they have as many candidates as seats available. Africa has five candidates for five seats, Latin America and the Caribbean has three for three, Eastern Europe has two for two and Western Europe and Others has two for two.

This election is less competitive than last year’s, when 17 candidates contested 15 seats. Only Latin America and the Caribbean and Eastern Europe had more candidates than seats, resulting in the defeat of Russia. In 2021, all 18 candidates running for 18 seats were elected, receiving between 144 and 189 votes out of a possible 193, despite some having extremely problematic human rights records.

Unfortunately, non-competitive elections are common, with fully closed slates being presented four times since 2008. Other elections have seen only one or two competitive slates. The problem with non-competitive races is they deprive voting states of the opportunity to rigorously evaluate and select candidates based on their records and commitments, potentially compromising the quality of the Council.

But even in closed slates, it’s still possible for unopposed candidates to fail if they don’t receive at least 97 out of 193 votes. In 2023, for example, Burundi and China received the lowest number of votes in their regional groups, sending a message that their candidacies were not fully supported. ISHR encourages voting states to evaluate all candidates carefully and withhold votes from problematic ones, even in closed slates.

Who are the candidates in the October election?

Candidates in this year’s election include Benin, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, The Gambia and Kenya from the African group. In the Asia and Pacific group, Cyprus, South Korea, the Marshall Islands, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Thailand are running. Latin America and the Caribbean is represented by Bolivia, Colombia and Mexico. Iceland, Spain and Switzerland are the candidates from Western Europe and Others, while the Czech Republic and North Macedonia are running for Central and Eastern Europe.

This year, one candidate has a particularly poor human rights record: Saudi Arabia. It has closed civic space and has been repeatedly included in the UN Secretary-General’s reprisals report and accused by UN experts of committing war crimes in Yemen. Due to these serious concerns, we are actively campaigning against its election in the Asia and Pacific group.

What’s the role of civil society in this process?

Civil society, including ISHR, has a crucial role to play in advocating for a more effective and accountable Human Rights Council. One of the key areas where reform is needed is closed slates. Competitive elections are essential to ensure that only states with a genuine commitment to human rights are elected.

ISHR has created scorecards to assess and compare the candidates based on their history of cooperation with human rights mechanisms such as the Universal Periodic Review and their engagement with civil society, UN treaty bodies and special procedures. These criteria provide a solid understanding and clear overview of a country’s human rights record and therefore its suitability to sit on the Council. While we understand no country has a perfect record, these criteria aim to provide valuable insights into each state’s commitment to upholding human rights and its potential role on the Council.

In addition to our scorecards, our annual joint pledging event with Amnesty International provides a platform for states to present their candidacies, make strong, public commitments as potential members and receive direct feedback and critical questions from civil society. If all candidates participated in this event, it would increase the political cost of refusing to participate or failing to submit formal pledges and commitments. Such engagement would make it harder for states with poor human rights records to seek a seat without facing scrutiny.

What should be the Council’s priorities?

The Human Rights Council is vital in amplifying the voices of rights holders, victims and human rights defenders, providing them with a platform to expose violations and demand accountability. To fulfil this role effectively, its priorities must focus on being credible, effective and accessible. It should continue to focus on upholding international law universally, supporting the remote and hybrid participation of civil society and ensuring that demands for accountability are promptly addressed.

A credible and effective Council can only function if its members fully cooperate with its mechanisms and adhere to objective human rights criteria. At a time of increasing conflict and crisis, often rooted in repression and human rights violations, the Council’s role in promoting accountability and justice is more important than ever. States should support the work of human rights defenders, whose efforts to prevent violations, document abuses and provide essential services are essential to crisis resolution.

To address these conflicts, states must apply human rights standards consistently. Selective or inconsistent application of standards undermines the international framework and the credibility of those involved. International human rights law, when applied consistently and in a principled manner, remains the best guide to achieving a more just, peaceful and inclusive world.

Get in touch with ISHR through its website or Facebook page, and follow @ishrglobal on Instagram and @ISHRglobal and @Madeleine_ISHR on Twitter.

 

Summit of the Future: Youth Driven Action Needed to Tackle Nuclear and Climate Crises

Posted on by admin

Active Citizens, Civil Society, Climate Change, Conferences, Development & Aid, Editors’ Choice, Featured, Global, Headlines, Human Rights, Humanitarian Emergencies, Nuclear Disarmament, Nuclear Energy – Nuclear Weapons, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations, Youth, Youth Thought Leaders

Nuclear Disarmament

Dr. Tshilidzi Marwala, USG and Rector of the United Nations University, and Ms. Kaoru Nemeto, Director of the United Nations Information Centre during a discussion ‘Building the Future: Synergetic Collaboration on Nuclear and Climate Crises.’ Credit: Naureen Hossain/IPS

Dr. Tshilidzi Marwala, USG and Rector of the United Nations University, and Ms. Kaoru Nemeto, Director of the United Nations Information Centre during a discussion ‘Building the Future: Synergetic Collaboration on Nuclear and Climate Crises.’ Credit: Naureen Hossain/IPS

UNITED NATIONS, Sep 23 2024 (IPS) – Driving the Summit of the Future’s core messages of international solidarity and decisive action are young people who are determined to address the intersecting issues that the world contends with today.

During the Summit’s Action Days (20-21 September), it was young people who led the conversations of increasing and defining meaningful engagement, both on- and off-site from the United Nations Headquarters.

Not only are they driving the conversation, but in the Pact for the Future adopted by world leaders at the United Nations on Sunday (September 22), youth and future generations are at the forefront of global leaders’ concerns, and their role was clearly defined with the first ever Declaration on Future Generations, with concrete steps to take account of future generations in our decision-making, including a possible envoy for future generations.

This includes a commitment to more “meaningful opportunities for young people to participate in the decisions that shape their lives, especially at the global level.”

Building the Future: Synergetic Collaboration on Nuclear and Climate Crises, a side event whose co-organizers included Soka Gakkai International (SGI) and the Future Action Festival Organizing Committee, with the support of the United Nations University (UNU) and the United Nations Information Centre (UNIC), brought together young activists to discuss the intersection between two different crises and what will define meaningful youth engagement.

Kaoru Nemoto, the Director General of UNIC in Tokyo, observed that it was “ground-breaking” to see the agenda of the Summit’s Action Days largely led and organized by youth participants, as signified by the majority of seats in the General Assembly Hall being filled by young activists.


“There is an undercurrent, a common message, that the youth can make this world a better place to live,” said Nemoto. “No matter what agenda you are working on, be it climate change, nuclear disarmament, fighting inequality… youth issues are cross-cutting, very strong cross-cutting issues across the board.”

Nemoto further added that the United Nations needs to do much more to engage youth for meaningful participation. This would mean allowing youth to consult in decision-making and to be in positions of leadership. Youth presence cannot be reduced to tokenism.

The climate and nuclear crises are existential threats that are deeply connected, said Dr. Tshilidzi Marwala, the rector of the United Nations University. Climate instability fuels the factors that lead to conflict and displacement. Conflict, such as what is happening in Sudan, Israel, Palestine, and Ukraine, increases the risk of nuclear escalation. As leaders in the present day tackle the issues, Marwala called on the youth to continue raising their voices and to hold those powers accountable.

Marwala noted that the United Nations University would be committed to “realizing meaningful participation” in all parties. For young people, while they are motivated and demonstrate a care for deeper social issues, they face challenges in having their voices heard or in feeling galvanized to take action. Marwala noted that it was important to reach out to those young people who are either not involved or feel discouraged from getting involved in political work and activism.

Chief among the Summit of the Future’s agenda is increasing youth participation in decision-making processes. It has long been acknowledged that young activists and civil society actors drive greater societal change and are motivated to act towards complex issues. Yet they frequently face challenges in participating in policymaking that would shape their countries’ positions.

Among these challenges are representation in political spaces. Within the context of Japan, young people are underrepresented in local and national politics. As Luna Serigano, an advocate from the Japan Youth Council, shared during the event, there is a wider belief among young voters in Japan that their voices will go unheard by authorities.

This is indicated in voter turnout, which shows that only 37 percent of voters are in their 20s, and only 54 percent of voters believe that their votes matter. By contrast, 71 percent of people in their 70s voted in elections. People in their 30s or younger account for just 1 percent of professionals serving in government councils and forums. The Japan Youth Council is currently advocating for active youth participation in the country’s climate change policy by calling for young people to be directly involved as committee members to work on a new energy plan for the coming year.

Yuuki Tokuda, a co-founder of GeNuine, a Japan-based NGO that explores nuclear issues through a gender perspective, shared that young people are out of decision-making spaces. Although their voices may be heard, it is not enough. As she told IPS, the climate and nuclear crises are on the minds of young people in Japan. And while they have ideas on what could be done, they are not informed on how to act.

There is some hope for increasing participation. Tokuda shared within policymakers on nuclear issues, of which 30 percent include women, have begun to engage with young people in these discussions.

“It is time to reconstruct systems so that youth can meaningfully participate in these processes,” said Tokuda. “We need more intergenerational participation in order to work towards the ban of nuclear weapons and the climate crisis.”

During the event, what meaningful youth engagement should look like was discussed. It was acknowledged that efforts have gone towards giving a space to the perspectives of young people. Including young people in the discussions is a critical step. It was suggested that direction should shift towards ensuring that young people have the authority to take the action needed to resolve intersecting, complex issues. Otherwise, the inclusion is meaningless.

“The future-oriented youth is more needed than ever to tackle the challenges in building and maintaining peace,” said Mitsuo Nishikata of SGI.

“As a youth-driven initiative such as what the Future Action Festival demonstrates, youth solidarity can stand as a starting point for resolving and passing issues.”

Next year (2025) will mark 80 years since the end of World War II and the Hiroshima-Nagasaki atomic bombings. Nishikata pointed out that this will be a time for crucial opportunities to advance the discussions on nuclear disarmament and climate action, ahead of the Third Meeting of State Parties on the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons and the 30th UN Climate Conference (COP30).

“We will continue to unite in our desire for peace, sharing the responsibility for future generations and expanding grassroots actions in Japan and globally.

Other commitments for the Pact for the Future included the first multilateral recommitment to nuclear disarmament in more than a decade, with a clear commitment to the goal of totally eliminating nuclear weapons.

It also pledged reform of the United Nations Security Council since the 1960s, with plans to improve the effectiveness and representativeness of the Council, including by redressing the historical underrepresentation of Africa as a priority.

The pact has at its core a commitment to “turbo-charge” implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), including the reform of the international financial architecture so that it better represents and serves developing countries.

“We cannot build a future that is suitable for our grandchildren with a system that our grandparents created,” as the Secretary-General António Guterres stated.

This article is brought to you by IPS Noram in collaboration with INPS Japan and Soka Gakkai International in consultative status with ECOSOC.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Using Education To Stop the Generational Cycle of Violence Against Women in the Pacific

Posted on by admin

Active Citizens, Asia-Pacific, Civil Society, Conferences, Development & Aid, Editors’ Choice, Featured, Gender, Gender Identity, Headlines, Human Rights, PACIFIC COMMUNITY, Pacific Community Climate Wire, Population, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations, Women & Climate Change, Women in Politics, Women’s Health

PACIFIC COMMUNITY

Marshall Islands President Hilda C. Heine departs the International Conference Centre after presenting her keynote speech during the first day of the 15th Triennial Conference of Pacific Women. Cr

Dr Hilda C. Heine, President, Republic of the Marshall Islands,
departs the International Conference Centre after presenting her keynote speech during the first day of the 15th Triennial Conference of Pacific Women. Credit: Chewy Lin/SPC

SYDNEY , Sep 20 2024 (IPS) – Parliamentary representation by women in Pacific Island countries remains stubbornly low at 8.4 percent. Yet women leaders across the region have been meeting every year for the past four decades to discuss goals and drive action to address gender inequality and the most pressing development challenges in the Pacific.

One of the critical issues discussed at the 15th Triennial Conference of Pacific Women, convened recently by the regional development organisation, Pacific Community, in Majuro, Republic of the Marshall Islands, was endemic levels of violence against women. Up to 68 percent of women in Pacific Island countries have suffered physical or sexual violence by a partner, more than double the global average of 30 percent, reported by the World Health Organization (WHO).

The conference is an invaluable opportunity for government, civil society and donor stakeholders to monitor progress on addressing this issue and identify action plans. And, for many Pacific women leaders, an important part of the long-term vision is preventing violence against women in the next generation. Educating the youth of today to change attitudes and behaviours that are perpetuating these human rights violations, and the severe socioeconomic repercussions is a critical strategy that the Pacific Community is working to roll out across the region.

“Young men and women can be impactful agents for change on the ground,” Mereseini Rakuita, Principal Strategic Lead for Pacific Women and Girls in the SPC executive team, told IPS. “The root cause of gender-based violence is unequal power relations between men and women. This necessitates the engagement of young men and women in advocacy work to enhance their understanding about this violence and its link to inequality.”

Group photo of delegates to the 15th Triennial Conference of Pacific Women held in Majuro, RMI. Credit: SPC

Group photo of delegates to the 15th Triennial Conference of Pacific Women held in Majuro, RMI. Credit: SPC

Growing the seed of change in young people is the vision behind the Pacific Girl project, managed by Pacific Women Lead at SPC, and also the Social Citizenship Education (SCE) program, which is part of the multi-partner Pacific Partnership to End Violence Against Women. The SCE program is supported by the European Union. It employs a ‘whole of School’ approach by training teachers in four Pacific Island countries, namely Kiribati, Vanuatu, Tuvalu and the Republic of the Marshall Islands, to embed education about human rights, gender equality and gender-based violence into the formal curriculum. And, also, informally, through the cultivation of respectful behaviours and supportive advocacy.

“In Kiribati, the SCE programme has rolled out nationally across all schools, whereas in Vanuatu it’s focused on six schools in the capital, Port Vila. In Tuvalu, it reaches four schools and 22 in the Marshall Islands across urban and rural locations,” Rakuita explained. “It successfully reaches many rural and remote communities; however, there are so many more to reach given the challenges of transport and resources, remembering that several Pacific Island countries have more than 300 islands.”

Senator Daisy Alik-Momotaro (left) with young Marshallese women sing prior to the first session on the third and final day of the 15th Triennial Conference of Pacific Women. Credit: SPC Chewy Lin

Senator Daisy Alik-Momotaro (left) with young Marshallese women sing prior to the first session on the third and final day of the 15th Triennial Conference of Pacific Women. Credit: SPC Chewy Lin

It is a strategy that resonates strongly with national leaders in Pacific Island countries. “I fully support this initiative,” Sokotia Kulene, Director of the Gender Affairs Department in Tuvalu’s Office of the Prime Minister, told IPS. “This is the mandate of the Tuvalu National Gender Equity Policy objective and plan of action, and it will make a difference by changing attitudes, behaviours and mindsets.”

Despite decades of awareness raising and international donor support for reducing the entrenched rates of violence against women, its prevalence remains stubbornly high across the region. The proportion of women who have experienced physical or sexual violence by a partner, ranges from 68 percent in Kiribati and 66 percent in Fiji to 62 percent in Samoa, reports UN Women. Globally, the Pacific Islands ranks the worst in the world for this form of violence. Fifty one percent of women in Melanesia have ever suffered physical or sexual violence, compared to 33 percent in Sub-Saharan Africa and 25 percent in Latin America and the Caribbean, according to WHO.

Marshall Islands’ Minister for Culture and Internal Affairs, Jess Gasper Jr. Credit:

“There is a need for greater investment in addressing the root causes of violence, such as tensions over economic insecurity in a family, which is exacerbated by climate change impacts and loss of livelihoods, and misinterpretation of the bible needs to be supported with transformative approaches to biblical teachings. And media content needs to be produced through various platforms to reach audiences in a way that educates men and boys, as well as women and girls,” Sharon Bhagwan Rolls, Programme Manager for the Pacific Women Mediators Network in Fiji, told IPS.

Gender inequality is the central cause of violence against women and girls. Making tangible progress to address this issue is hampered by additional barriers, including low levels of education in remote areas, perceptions of women’s lower social status, abuse of alcohol and financial abuse within families. And now, in the twenty-first century, the issue is further exacerbated by technology-facilitated gender-based violence.

It is also a major challenge to overcome the strong stigma of domestic and sexual violence in communities that influences the reluctance of survivors of gender-based violence to report these crimes to the police, resulting in a high level of impunity for perpetrators.

“In Fiji, only half of women living with violence have ever told anyone about it and only 24 percent of survivors of violence in Fiji have ever sought help from an agency or formal authority,” Rakuita claims.

From L to R RMI Senator Daisy Alik-Momotaro, Tuvalu Prime Minister and Minister of Gender Equity and Women Empowerment, Mr Feleti Teo, and Marshall Islands’ Minister for Culture & Internal Affairs Jess Gasper Jr. Credit: SPC/Chewy Lin

From L to R: RMI Senator Daisy Alik-Momotaro, Tuvalu Prime Minister and Minister of Gender Equity and Women Empowerment, Feleti Teo, and Marshall Islands’ Minister for Culture & Internal Affairs, Jess Gasper Jr. Credit: SPC/Chewy Lin

Survivors are, therefore, often trapped in a continuous cycle of abuse when spouses or partners control women’s access to financial resources and the means to independence. And the effects on women’s lives are devastating. Beatings and injuries from violent attacks leave deep physical and mental wounds, including disability, while sexual violations expose women to sexually transmitted diseases. The damage to a woman’s mental health ranges from depression and post-traumatic stress disorder to a high risk of suicide.

The broader costs of domestic violence to island societies and nations are immense. In Fiji, 43 women are physically maimed by domestic assaults every day and, in Papua New Guinea, up to 90 percent of all injuries presented by women to health facilities are due to gender-based violence, reports the Pacific Community. Studies in Vanuatu show that children with mothers who suffer domestic violence are far more likely to drop out of school. And it impacts national economies, such as Fiji, where violence contributes to 10 days of lost work time per employee per annum.

The support of Pacific Island governments and male leaders, in partnership with women, is essential to any meaningful progress.

“If most leaders in the Pacific are men, then their engagement is critical,” Rakuita explained. “We have some great examples in the Pacific of male leaders taking on this critical developmental challenge. The PNG National Parliament has a Standing Committee on gender-based violence as an oversight mechanism on the country’s response to GBV efforts. This was driven by male leaders and led by them—male leaders who recognise the deep impacts GBV is having on their communities and have had enough. They have rightly exercised their power whilst in office to create something sustainable.

There are now signs that the SCE programme, Pacific Girl and other initiatives are triggering leadership in young islanders. At SCE there are after-school clubs for students, organised to directly engage boys and girls in more than 150 primary and secondary schools in the four participating countries. “Students who have participated in the clubs are now demonstrating leadership roles in their schools, such as leading school assemblies, building positive and healthy relationships among their peers and conducting awareness sessions about violence against women in schools and communities,” Rakuita said.

For Kulene, there are major long-term gains of reducing gender-based violence, which would significantly “contribute to Tuvalu’s sustainable development goals,” whether it is improving good health, diminishing poverty, or strengthening peace, justice and economic development.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

A UN 2.0 Needs Robust People’s Civil Society Participation

Posted on by admin

Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, Climate Change, Conferences, Democracy, Economy & Trade, Environment, Featured, Global, Headlines, Human Rights, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Credit: United Nations

NEW YORK, Sep 13 2024 (IPS) – A cascade of crises endangers our world. Wars conducted without rules, governance devoid of democratic principles, surge in discrimination against women and excluded groups, accelerating climate change, greed-induced environmental degradation and unconscionable economic deprivation in an age of excess are threatening to roll back decades of human progress made by the international community.

This September’s UN Summit of the Future presents a rare opportunity to address these challenges through greater participation in UN decision making. World leaders are convening later this month in New York to agree a Pact for the Future, expected to lay the blueprint for international cooperation in the 21st century.

But civil society’s efforts to ensure an outcome document fit for today’s needs are coming up against diplomatic posturing between powerful states intent on preserving the status quo.

State-centric decisions

The world has changed dramatically since the UN was established in 1945, when a large swathe of humanity was still under colonial yoke. Since then, significant strides have been made to advance democratic governance around the world. Yet decision-making processes at the UN remain stubbornly state-centric, privileging a handful of powerful states that control decisions and key appointments.

Civil society has presented the Pact of the Future’s co-facilitators, the governments of Germany and Namibia, with several innovative proposals to enable meaningful participation and people-centred decision-making at the UN. Proposals include a parliamentary assembly representative of the world’s peoples, a world citizen’s initiative to enable people to bring issues of transnational importance to the UN and the appointment of a civil society or people’s envoy to drive the UN’s outreach to communities around the world. However, these forward-looking proposals have found no traction in various drafts of the Pact, which is being criticised for lacking ambition and specificity.

It’s no surprise that diplomatic negotiations on the Pact between country representatives are being bogged down by arguments over language. As a result of diplomatic wrangling, the draft’s provisions are mostly generic and repetitive.

This is unfortunate, as civil society representatives have spent considerable time and energy over the course of the past year in engaging with Summit of the Future processes. Despite tight deadlines, civil society organisations came together at short notice to submit comprehensive recommendations on the Pact’s successive drafts. Hundreds of civil society delegates participated at considerable expense in the much-anticipated Civil Society Conference in Nairobi, designed to gather inputs to feed into the Summit outcomes.

Overall, the gains made so far have been few. These include broad commitments to reform the UN Security Council and international financial institutions. A significantly positive aspect of the Pact’s draft is a commitment to strengthen the UN’s human rights pillar; many of us in civil society rely on this to raise concerns about egregious violations. However, deep-seated tensions among member states in New York have led to the regrettable removal of references to human rights defenders, who play a crucial role in protecting and promoting human rights. This is evident in the recent Revision 3 draft of the Pact released on 27 August.

Strengthening human rights

Tellingly, the human rights pillar receives roughly five per cent of the UN’s regular budget, forcing any new initiatives to rely on underfunded voluntary contributions. This needs to change. The human rights pillar needs to be strengthened. Doing so would help make each of the three UN’s pillars – the others being peace and security and sustainable development – more strongly connected and mutually reinforcing.

To strengthen the human rights pillar, we outline five priority areas for action.

First, substantial resources should be allocated to the UN’s independent thematic and country-focused human rights experts, who enhance civil society’s impact but are forced to get by on shoestring budgets. Due to limited funding from the UN, the experts are compelled to rely on voluntary contributions to support their vital activities.

Second, an accessible and transparently managed pooled fund should be created to enable better participation by civil society in UN meetings. Many smaller civil society organisations, particularly from the global south, find it extremely challenging to cover the costs of participation in key UN arenas.

Third, accountability measures should be strengthened to ensure follow-up in cases of reprisals against people for engaging with UN human rights mechanisms. The UN’s latest reprisals report shows that reprisals have taken place against over 150 individuals in more than 30 states. This needs to be addressed immediately.

Fourth, the UN’s investigative capacities in relation to war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide should be strengthened to ensure justice for victims. The need for this has been made tragically clear by the resurgence of authoritarian rule and military dictatorships around the world, coupled with egregious rights violations in conflicts in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Myanmar, Sudan, Ukraine, Yemen and others.

Finally, the human rights pillar can be supported by ensuring implementation of the UN’s guidance note on civic space. This urges the protection of civil society personnel and human rights defenders from intimidation and reprisals, the facilitation of meaningful and safe participation in governance processes and the promotion of laws and policies to support these goals.

The role human rights defenders and civil society activists play in ensuring peaceful resolution of conflicts, addressing gender-based violence and promoting economic justice – among many other vital issues – is crucial. In calling to strengthen the human rights pillar, the Pact’s pen holders recognise the importance of human rights approaches. They must extend this recognition to include people’s and civil society participation. Failing to do so will result in a missed opportunity to create a transformative UN 2.0 that places people and rights at the centre.

Jesselina Rana is UN advisor at CIVICUS, the global civil society alliance. Mandeep Tiwana is chief of evidence and engagement at CIVICUS plus representative to the UN in New York.