Summit of the Future: On the Need for Civil Society to Make Its Voice Count at the UN

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Climate Action, Conferences, Environment, Gender, Global, Headlines, Human Rights, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Sarah Strack is Forus Director

Civil society leaders at the Forus General Assembly in Gaborone, Botswana. Credit: Forus

NEW YORK, Sep 20 2024 (IPS) – In a context of shrinking civic space that threatens civil society participation in an increasing number of countries and all the way to some UN processes, world leaders will gather to discuss the “multilateralism we want” at the Summit of the Future at the United Nations headquarters in New York.

The summit aims to tackle one fundamental question: How can the global community cooperate better to meet present needs while preparing for future challenges?

Already in February, over 400 civil society organisations, under the UNmute initiative, issued a collective statement for more meaningful engagement of civil society in the preparatory process of the Summit of the Future. One thing is clear: civil society’s engagement has largely been limited to virtual consultations and written inputs at relatively short notice, signaling a deterioration of opportunities for participation of civil society.

The limited access to informal consultations with Member States, coupled with the lack of interpretation services, further restricts participation for non-English speakers and those outside of the New York “bubble”. This asymmetry creates barriers to meaningful dialogue between civil society and Member States.

Civil society organisations continue to call for designated seats and consistent participation channels to ensure their voices are included and have a genuine impact on the outcomes.

As we approach the Summit of the Future taking place next week in New York, here’s what to expect and some key asks.

It’s time to walk the talk

The Summit of the Future arrives at a moment when it is more important than ever for global institutions to demonstrate accountability and deliver tangible results, to rebuild trust. With the Pact for the Future, the Summit aims to design a roadmap to strengthen multilateralism and advance collective action and accountability for the 2030 Agenda and beyond.

Civil society leaders at the Forus General Assembly in Gaborone, Botswana. Credit: Forus

“Civil society has always warned of the urgency of the polycrisis and has suggested concrete solutions. However, despite strong speeches, country leaders have taken weak action. What we have witnessed is a lack of commitment to life and the planet,” says Henrique Frota, executive director of Abong, the national NGO platform of Brazil, and C20 Chair.

In past summits, we have seen pledges that looked good on paper but failed to translate into systemic changes. The whole Agenda 2030 is increasingly considered “non-binding” with several governments failing to uphold their commitments. In Argentina, newly elected president Javier Milei decided not to pursue a Voluntary National Review in 2024, reversing the previous administration’s commitment. In Colombia, for the first time, the government reviewed only one SDG in 2024—SDG 2 (zero hunger) —a move that raised concerns about the increasing risk of cherry-picking.

These examples reflect a broader global trend: international agendas, including the SDGs, may not be prioritised, raising concerns about potential rollback of commitments. Without clear accountability mechanisms, these global agreements risk remaining aspirational rather than actionable.

“We are at an inflection point that will largely determine what outcomes we harvest by December 2030- the year governments have committed to bringing an end to many of the challenges and crises facing our world today. At the current rate the global goals remain elusive as they were when those commitments were made some 8 years ago. The world needs bold leadership, moving from rhetoric to action. Never again can we wait for another summit before the world sees the changes it so much deserves. That clock stopped ticking already!” says Oyebisi, B. Oluseyi, Executive Director at NNNGO, the national NGO platform in Nigeria.

He adds, to move forward, instead of rushing backwards, governments need to make clear, measurable commitments and introduce robust accountability mechanisms to ensure international agreements lead to real, inclusive outcomes for a better future for people and planet.

Strengthening inclusive governance

While civil society continues to push for a stronger focus on equity, solidarity, inclusion and participation, the final framework for the Summit of the Future is still under negotiation.

The lack of consistent engagement opportunities remains a barrier for civil society to contribute effectively. Each accredited civil society organisation has been allowed to send two representatives to the Summit. However, we recently learned that, due to high demand, civil society representatives may only be able to attend one of the two days of the Summit.

“The Agenda 2030 starts by stating that “All countries and all stakeholders, acting in collaborative partnership, will implement this plan.” This is not possible if civil society is excluded from deliberations and negotiations. Crucially, it also prevents the pledge to leave no one behind from being fulfilled, as civil society is unable to bring to the table the voices of those facing societal and structural discrimination,” says Silla Ristimäki, Advocacy Lead at FINGO, the national NGO platform of Finland.

Ndey Sireng, Executive Director of Gambia’s national NGO platform TANGO, echoes this concern, stressing “the importance of inclusive participation, especially for youth and women”, and urging governments to create an enabling environment for civil society.

“For global governance to truly deliver for both people and planet, civil society must be at the core of decision-making processes. Civil society’s engagement ensures that policies are not only crafted in conference rooms but are rooted in the lived realities and aspirations of the people they aim to serve. Given the closed nature of the consultations leading up to the Summit of the Future, it’s likely that the aspirations of the majority of global citizens have not been fully captured,” says Chris Nkwatsibwe, Policy, Governance & Civic Engagement lead at UNNGOF, the national NGO platform in Uganda.

On the need to protect civil society

While the Summit’s agenda focuses on human rights, it does not emphasize the shrinking civic space worldwide and the lack of an enabling environment for civil society organisations. Civil society organisations encounter increasing restrictions, with freedoms of association, peaceful assembly, and expression being curtailed in many countries.

In Honduras, as shared by the national NGO platform Asonog, in 2023 and 2024 over 18 defenders have been killed for defending their territories – including Honduran environment and anti-corruption activist Juan López, just last week, for his struggle against extractive industries. International solidarity is very important at this time of such impunity and defenselessness – with several countries unable to “defend the defenders” and to provide justice to victims.

Additionally, a wide cross-section of civil society from national NGO platforms to grassroots groups – continues to face various forms of “bureaucratic” and administrative barriers, as reported by members across the Forus network. In vulnerable political contexts, including post-electoral contexts, civil society bears the brunt of repercussions from “civic violence”, despite advocating for peaceful dialogue. A recent Forus study showed that only 4% of our Global Majority members experienced no barrier from current laws and regulations for their activities. Just 7,5% of all Forus members representing more than 24,000 NGOs, worldwide reported receiving effective support from their governments in terms of capacities and resources.

Forus is advocating for reforms that protect civic space and the promotion of an enabling environment for civil society, ensuring that civil society can play its role in holding governments accountable and championing the needs and asks of communities. Without these protections, the ability of civil society to contribute to the implementation and monitoring of global agreements, including the SDGs, will remain severely compromised.

“One cannot imagine inclusive growth and vibrant global institutions without space for civil society,” says Harsh Jaitly, Director of VANI, the national NGO platform of India.

“As civil society actors, we stand on the shoulders of grassroot actors, social movements, human rights defenders and many others who have pushed for civil rights, gender equality, and climate action, in a manner that has indeed changed the world. When looking to the future, we need an inclusive global policymaking to ensure positive change and that the needs of the most vulnerable are kept at the heart of the solutions,” says Mette Müller Kristensen, Director at Global Focus, the national NGO platform of Denmark.

Kathrine Skamris of Global Focus reinforces this, emphasizing that civil society brings “valuable knowledge and diverse perspectives, which are crucial to the discussions at the UN”. She stresses the importance of including these voices at both the Summit of the Future and throughout the follow-up process.

What Comes After the Summit of the Future?

The Summit of the Future is just one stage of the journey towards “the future we want”. It is just one step. Attention will then shift to key events in 2025, including the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development (FFD4), the World Social Summit, UNFCCC COP 30 in Brazil, and the World Urban Forum. These events will contribute to discussions on shaping the post-2030 Agenda, ensuring that future global cooperation remains focused on sustainability, equity, and inclusion.

In the words of Zia Ur Rehman, of the Asia Development Alliance, a regional NGO platform, the Summit is a beginning, bringing “hope for the commencement of integrated efforts.” Similarly, Arjun Bhattarai from Nepal’s NFN, the national NGO platform of Nepal, highlights the need for civil society to continue advocating for better “global governance, accountability, and a financial architecture that prioritizes the well-being of people and saves the planet. If the Pacts and promises of the Summit of the Future are implemented properly and timely, they could fulfil the hopes and aspirations of youth and future generations.”

We need more than just Summits and events – we need a vision that addresses immediate crises while shaping truly inclusive global cooperation, and more than anything, we need bolder action that doesn’t shy away from putting the rights of people and the planet first.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

25TH Anniversary Message to the UN: Prioritize the Culture of Peace in its Leadership Agenda

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Democracy, Education, Featured, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, Peace, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

NEW YORK, Sep 13 2024 (IPS) – This opinion piece is being published exactly on the date when twenty-five years ago today the UN took its most forward-looking stride in ensuring a peaceful planet for all of us since the signing of the Charter of the United Nations in 1945.

The UN Charter arose out of the ashes of the Second World War and the UN Declaration and the Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace emerged in the aftermath of the long-drawn Cold War.

On this very day, the United Nations adopted by consensus and without reservation a monumental document on the Culture of Peace that transcends boundaries, cultures, societies, and nations.

Arduous journey

It was an honour for me to Chair the nine-month long open-ended negotiations that led to the agreement on that historic norm-setting document which is considered as one of the most significant legacies of the United Nations that would endure generations.

I introduced the agreed text of that document (A/RES/53/243) on behalf of all Member States for adoption by the Assembly with its President Didier Opertti of Uruguay chairing the meeting. Through this landmark adoption, the General Assembly laid down humanity’s charter for the new approaching millennium.

Ambassador Anwarul K. Chowdhury

This document explains, outlines, and defines everything that the international community has agreed on as the focus of the culture of peace. I would always treasure and cherish the opportunity to lead the process in its adoption and in its subsequent advocacy.

For me this has been a realization of my personal commitment to peace and my humble contribution to humanity. For more than two and a half decades, my focus has been on advancing the culture of peace and I have continued to devote considerable time, energy, and effort to do that.

It has been a long, arduous journey – a journey ridden curiously with both obstacles and indifference. Since July 1997, when I took the initiative to write to our much-loved and highly respected Secretary-General Kofi Annan to create a separate item of agenda of the General Assembly, the path and progress of the culture of peace at UN have been uneven to say the least. For being a part of this journey, I pay tribute to Bangladeshi diplomats who have been true co-travellers.

My life’s experience has taught me to value peace and equality as the essential components of our existence. They unleash the positive forces of good that are so needed for human progress. It is essential to remember that the culture of peace requires a change of our hearts, change of our mindset.

The objective of the culture of peace is the empowerment of people. We should not isolate peace as something separate. It is important to realize that the absence of peace takes away the opportunities that we need to better ourselves, to prepare ourselves, to empower ourselves to face the challenges of our lives, individually and collectively.

Transformation is the essence

The essence of the culture of peace is its message of self-transformation and its message of inclusiveness, of global solidarity, of the oneness of humanity. These elements—individual and global, individual to global—constitute the way forward for the culture of peace.

‘Transformation’ is of the most essential relevance here. The Programme of Action identifies eight specific areas which encourage actions at all levels – the individual, the family, the community, the national, the regional and, of course, the global levels.

Though the Declaration and Programme of Action is an agreement among nations, governments, civil society, media, and individuals are all identified in this document as key actors.

The culture of peace begins with each one of us – unless we are ready to integrate peace and non-violence as part of our daily existence, we cannot expect our communities, our nations, our planet to be peaceful. We should be prepared and confident in resolving the challenges of our lives in a non-aggressive manner. In today’s world, more so, the humanity’s creed should be based on inner oneness and outer diversity.

Enhancing Member States engagement

To accord an enhanced profile to the concept of the culture of peace, since 2012, successive UN General Assembly Presidents convened an annual UN High Level Forum on The Culture of Peace to provide an inclusive, participatory platform for UN Member States, civil society, media, private sector and other interested parties to exchange ideas on the implementation of the Declaration and Programme of Action.

Since 2012, when the first UN High Level Forum was convened by the President of the 66th Session of the General Assembly Ambassador Nassir Al-Nasser, the UNGA mandated this annual Forum as “an opportunity for renewing the commitments to strengthen further the global movement for the culture of peace.”

At the global level, the Global Movement for The Culture of Peace (GMCoP), a coalition of civil society organizations, have been spearheading advocacy initiatives effectively since 2011 as well as in organizing the annual High-Level Forums on The Culture of Peace convened by the President of UN General Assembly.

Peace and Culture of Peace

Many treat peace and culture of peace synonymously. When we speak of peace, we expect others namely politicians, diplomats, or other practitioners to take the initiative while when we speak of the culture of peace, we know that initial action begins with each one of us.

SDGs and the Culture of Peace

The UN General Assembly decided on the culture of peace before the Millennium Development Goals. SDGs came 15 years later. Many would recall that Goal 16 – the so-called peace goal – was almost dropped when the developing countries wanted to include a reference to the culture of peace.

A compromise excluded it so that the negotiated Goal 16 could be agreed without it. Bangladesh brought the reference to the culture of peace in Goal 4 in its target 4.7 which identified culture of peace and non-violence as well as global citizenship in educational context.

All eight areas of action in the culture of peace programme are reflected in various SDGs. I can however say with pride that the Culture of Peace would outlast the SDGs and make more deep-rooted and longer-lasting contribution to a sustainable and peaceful planet of ours when the UN observes the 30th anniversary of The Culture of Peace.

Let me end by outlining the three integrated mainstream for the coming years bolstering the global movement for the culture of peace.

Education for global citizenship

Number one: education. All educational institutions need to offer opportunities that prepare the students not only to live fulfilling lives but also to be responsible and productive citizens of the world. This should more appropriately be called “education for global citizenship”. If our minds could be likened to a computer, then education provides the software with which to “reboot” our priorities and actions for transition from force to reason, from conflict to dialogue.

Equality of women’s participation

Number two: women. As I always say emphatically –
“Without peace, development cannot be realized, without development, peace is not achievable, but without women, neither peace nor development is possible.”

Youth and children

And number three: youth and children. It is essential to recognize the empowerment of young people as a major element in building the culture of peace. Young people of today should embrace the culture of peace in a way that can not only shape their lives but can also shape the future of the world.

For this, I believe that early childhood affords a window of opportunity for us to sow the seeds of transition to the culture of peace from an early life.

Way forward

As former Secretary-General of the United Nations and Nobel Peace laureate Kofi Annan had profoundly said, “Over the years we have come to realize that it is not enough to send peacekeeping forces to separate warring parties. It is not enough to engage in peace-building efforts after societies have been ravaged by conflict. It is not enough to conduct preventive diplomacy. All of this is essential work, but we want enduring results. We need, in short, the culture of peace.”

How do we build and promote the culture of peace? To turn the culture of peace into a global, universal movement, the most crucial element that is needed is for every one of us to be a true believer in peace and non-violence. A lot can be achieved in promoting the culture of peace through individual resolve and action.

By immersing ourselves in a culture that supports and promotes peace, individual efforts will–over time–combine and unite, and peace, security and sustainability will emerge. This is the only way we shall achieve a just and sustainable peace in the world.

The culture of peace is not a quick fix. It is a movement, not a revolution.

The seed of peace exists in all of us. It must be nurtured, cared for and promoted by us all to flourish. Peace cannot be imposed from outside – it must be realized from within.

Ambassador Anwarul K. Chowdhury, is Former Permanent Representative of Bangladesh to the UN; President of the UN Security Council (2000 and 2001); Senior Special Adviser to UN General Assembly President (2011-2012) and Former Under-Secretary-General and High Representative of the UN.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

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.

 

A Better Tomorrow with South-South Cooperation

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Development & Aid, Economy & Trade, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, South-South, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Credit: United Nations

UNITED NATIONS, Sep 12 2024 (IPS) – The annual United Nations Day for South-South Cooperation, commemorated annually on September 12, serves as a powerful reminder of the spirit of solidarity and cooperation that transcends geographic borders — a spirit that is crucial for securing a better and thriving future for all. In a world facing cross-cutting challenges, the importance of this South-South solidarity cannot be overstated.

We are now at a pivotal moment in our journey towards the 2030 Agenda. Regrettably, our progress has been far from satisfactory. Only 17 per cent of the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) targets are on track to be achieved. Nearly half of the targets show minimal or moderate progress, and alarmingly, progress on over a third of them has stalled or even regressed.

These figures are not just numbers; they represent lives, futures, and the hope of billions around the world.

The global landscape is increasingly marked by a growing number of conflicts, escalating geopolitical and trade tensions, and the devastating impacts of climate change. These challenges have placed the SDGs in serious jeopardy, and it is the world’s most vulnerable populations who are bearing the brunt of these crises. In this context, the potential of South-South cooperation and triangular cooperation to catalyze progress towards the SDGs has never been more critical.

As we look ahead to the Summit of the Future, the commemoration of the United Nations Day for South-South Cooperation offers us a timely opportunity to reflect on the progress we have made together through this modality. More importantly, it compels us to recognize the vast potential that South-South cooperation holds in building a more equitable and sustainable future.

South-South cooperation is no longer a peripheral concept; it is now widely recognized as a powerful vehicle that fosters inclusive growth, mutual learning, and shared success.

Across the developing world, we are witnessing remarkable strides in resilience building, innovation, and collaboration. These achievements demonstrate that by mobilizing international solidarity and forging global partnerships through South-South and triangular cooperation, we can accelerate the achievement of the SDGs.

Dima Al-Khatib, Director of the United Nations Office for South-South Cooperation

This potential has been highlighted in numerous global discussions and summits, both within the United Nations and beyond. Whether the focus is on Least Developed Countries, Small Island Developing States, Middle-Income Countries, water, or trade, the message is clear: South-South cooperation is delivering results.

We are seeing incredible successes in the Global South, from improving health systems and enhancing agricultural productivity to advancing education and technology.

Consider the Republic of Congo, which is drawing on Brazil’s expertise in family farming and school feeding programs to improve food security and nutrition. Or Cuba, whose medical professionals have been on the frontlines, combatting disease across the South.

In the Pacific, UNESCO is facilitating exchanges among countries like Fiji, the Marshall Islands, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, and Vanuatu to build teachers’ capacities. These are just a few examples of how countries of the Global South are not only sharing knowledge and resources, but are also building enduring partnerships that transcend borders.

The United Nations Office for South-South Cooperation (UNOSSC) plays a pivotal role in promoting, coordinating, and supporting these efforts globally and within the UN system. Our work involves identifying synergies and promoting collaboration between partners to attain all internationally agreed development goals.

One of the key tools we have developed in this endeavor is the South-South Galaxy — a digital platform that offers more than 950 Southern-grown SDG good practices. These practices are available to all countries for experience sharing and scaling up, providing a wealth of knowledge that has already lifted millions out of poverty and contributed to a more equitable world.

The South-South and Triangular Cooperation Solutions Lab, hosted on the same platform, is another innovative initiative. This Lab has begun incubating and testing scalable South-South and triangular cooperation solutions, driving forward new ways to tackle the complex challenges we face.

Our South-South Trust Funds are another testament to the solidarity of Southern partners. For example, the Government of India has channeled over $55.5 million into 63 projects that support sustainable development across more than 30 Small Island Developing States through the India-UN Development Partnership Fund.

Similarly, the IBSA Fund — supported by India, Brazil, and South Africa — continues to leverage the tried-and-tested power of South-South and triangular cooperation to bring tangible improvements to the daily lives of people across the globe. From providing safe drinking water to 12,000 people in Cabo Verde to developing a national universal health insurance program in Grenada, these initiatives showcase the impact of collaborative efforts.

Triangular cooperation – where South-South cooperation is supported by a developed country(ies) or multilateral organization(s) – also plays a critical role. For instance, the Republic of Korea and the Mekong River Commission are working together to share science and technology know-how, implementing the water, food, and energy nexus for vulnerable communities in Cambodia, Lao PDR, Thailand, and Viet Nam.

Later this year, we will launch a dedicated Triangular Cooperation Window to optimize this modality of support and enhance the sharing of experiences among partners.

Despite these achievements, we recognize that significant work remains ahead. We are navigating a world shaped by new and complex global challenges — what some have called a poly-crisis.

Climate change, economic uncertainties, debt injustice, conflict, and the ongoing recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic continue to test our resilience. Yet, I remain confident that through South-South and triangular cooperation, we can turn these challenges into opportunities for transformative equitably change.

On this United Nations Day for South-South Cooperation, I call on all stakeholders — including governments, our UN family, civil society, academia and the private sector — to join hands in strengthening South-South cooperation. Let us commit to expanding partnerships, deepening our collaborations, and ensuring that no one is left behind.

Together, we can achieve the Sustainable Development Goals and build a future that is prosperous, inclusive, and sustainable for all.

Please join us!

Dima Al-Khatib is the Director of the United Nations Office for South-South Cooperation. She took up her duties as Director of UNOSSC on 1 March 2023. She is a Sustainable Development Professional bringing more than 25 years of leadership and management experience in several duty stations to her role.

Prior to joining UNOSSC, Ms. Al-Khatib served as the UNDP Resident Representative in the Republic of Moldova. Prior to that, she held several positions including that of Programme and Policy Coordinator at the UNDP Regional Hub in Amman, UNDP Deputy Resident Representative in Kuwait, and UNDP Deputy Country Director in Libya.

Ms. Al-Khatib holds a Diplome d’Etudes Approfondies (DEA) in Environmental Health from the Lebanese University and France University of Bordeaux II, and a Bachelor of Science and a Teaching Diploma in Environmental Health from the American University of Beirut. Dima Al-Khatib tweets at @dimaalkhatib1

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Nicaragua, China, India among 55 Nations Restricting Freedom of Movement

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Democracy, Featured, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, Latin America & the Caribbean, Press Freedom, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Credit: Freedom House

WASHINGTON, Aug 27 2024 (IPS) – At least 55 governments in the past decade have restricted the freedom of movement for people they deem as threats, including journalists, according to a Freedom House report published last Thursday.

Governments control freedom of movement via travel bans, revoking citizenship, document control and denial of consular services, the report found. All the tactics are designed to coerce and punish government critics, according to Jessica White, the report’s London-based co-author.

“This is a type of tactic that really shows the vindictive and punitive nature of some countries,” White said. This form of repression “is an attempt to really stifle peoples’ ability to speak out freely from wherever they are.”

Belarus, China, India, Nicaragua, Russia, Rwanda and Saudi Arabia are among the countries that engage in this form of repression, the report found. Freedom House based its findings in part on interviews with more than 30 people affected by mobility controls.

Travel bans are the most common tactic, according to White, with Freedom House identifying at least 40 governments who prevent citizens leaving or returning to the country.

Revoking citizenship is another strategy, despite being prohibited by international law. The Nicaraguan government in 2023 stripped more than 200 political prisoners of their citizenship shortly after deporting them to the United States.

Among them were Juan Lorenzo Holmann, head of Nicaragua’s oldest newspaper, La Prensa. “It is as if I do not exist anymore. It is another attack on my human rights,” he told VOA after being freed. “But you cannot do away with the person’s personality. In the Nicaraguan constitution, it says that you cannot wipe out a person’s personal records or take away their nationality. I feel Nicaraguan, and they cannot take that away from me.”

Before being expelled from his own country, Lorenzo had spent 545 days in prison, in what was widely viewed as a politically motivated case.

Blocking access to passports and other travel documents is another tactic. In one example, Hong Kong in June canceled the passports of six pro-democracy activists who were living in exile in Britain.

In some cases, governments refuse to issue people passports to trap them in the country. And in cases where the individual is already abroad, embassies deny passport renewals to block the individual from traveling anywhere, including back home.

Myanmar’s embassy in Berlin, for instance, has refused to renew the passport of Ma Thida, a Burmese writer in exile in Germany. Ma Thida told VOA earlier this year she believes the refusal is in retaliation for her writing.

White said Ma Thida’s case was a classic example of mobility restrictions. For now, the German government has issued a passport reserved for people who are unable to obtain a passport from their home country — which White applauded but said is still rare.

“Our ability to freely leave and return to our home country is something that in democratic societies, people often take for granted. It’s one of our fundamental human rights, but it’s one that is being undermined and violated across many parts of the world,” White said.

Mobility restrictions can have devastating consequences, including making it difficult to work, travel and visit family. What makes matters even worse is the emotional toll, according to White.

“There is a huge psychological impact,” White said. “A lot of our interviewees mention especially the pain of being separated from family members and not being able to return to their country.”

In the report, Freedom House called on democratic governments to impose sanctions on actors that engage in mobility controls.

White said that democratic governments should do more to help dissidents, including by providing them with alternative travel documents if they can’t obtain them from their home countries.

https://freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/2024-02/FIW_2024_DigitalBooklet.pdf

Source: Voice of America (VOA)

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Explainer: COP16—What’s It About and What Does It Need to Achieve?

Posted on by admin

Biodiversity, Combating Desertification and Drought, Conferences, Conservation, COP16, COP29, Editors’ Choice, Environment, Featured, Global, Headlines, Humanitarian Emergencies, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Biodiversity

David Cooper, Deputy Executive Secretary, Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), Canadian Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault, Colombian Environment Minister Susana Muhamad and CBD Executive Secretary Astrid Schomaker at a recent press conference in which they looked ahead to COP16. Credit: CBD

David Cooper, Deputy Executive Secretary, Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), Canadian Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault, Colombian Environment Minister Susana Muhamad and CBD Executive Secretary Astrid Schomaker at a recent press conference in which they looked ahead to COP16. Credit: CBD

JOHANNESBURG, Aug 27 2024 (IPS) – ‘Peace with Nature’ is the theme for the 16th meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP16) to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), which will take place in Cali, Colombia, between October 21 and November 1, 2024.

But what does ‘Peace with Nature’ mean?

Minister of Environment and Sustainable Development, Susana Muhamad

For COP16 chair and Minister of Environment and Sustainable Development, Susana Muhamad, the theme of Peace with Nature means understanding that climate change and restoring nature are both sides of the same coin.

“That’s the main motivation why Colombia decided to host this conference, we see there is a double movement that humanity has to make,” Muhamad told a press briefing on August 22, 2024.

Her vision clearly places biodiversity as politically relevant as the climate change agenda.

While it is crucial to decarbonize and have a just energy transition, it’s equally important to “restore nature” so that it can, in the end, “stabilize the climate.”

She outlines three political successes: strong engagement from all sectors, positioning biodiversity as a parallel movement to decarbonization, and approving the Digital Sequencing Information Fund.

“At the same time as we are not decarbonizing, the climate will continue changing, and nature will not have the time to adapt,” Muhamad said. “And if nature collapses, communities and people will also collapse, and society will collapse.”

COP16’s role as the first of three COPs (organized respectively by the UNCBD, UNFCCC and UNCCD) this year is to bring “political and economic awareness to biodiversity and so bring humanity back to safe limits during the 21st century.”

CBD Executive Secretary Astrid Schomaker

For CBD’s Executive Secretary Astrid Schomaker, the Columbian presidency’s theme of Peace with Nature is a call to action.

She describes the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGVF) as the blueprint for making peace with nature, with four goals: protecting and restoring nature, sharing benefits, investing in nature, and collaborating with nature.

Schomaker asserts that COP16 is essential for resolving the outstanding issues from COP 15.

“This is about access and benefit sharing of digital sequence information from genetic resources. Now that’s a very technical subject, but the very, very important one also in terms of the mobilization of resources, but also in terms of the understanding of how we interact with nature, that when we take from nature, we benefit from nature, we give back to nature.”

Schomaker also referred to the need to finance biodiversity with international support, adding to Canada’s donation of USD 200 million. The fund currently stands at USD 300 million.

Finally, COP16 will include initiatives that will bring indigenous peoples and local communities to the table and elevate their voices so that the traditional knowledge they can bring can deepen the debate.

Canadian Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault

Handing over the baton to the COP16 presidency, Guilbeault looked back at COP15, which has been termed biodiversity’s “Paris moment,” referring to the Paris Climate Treaty of 2015, which aims to hold “the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels” and pursue efforts “to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.”

Despite the achievements and hard work, biodiversity issues are still challenging, and are not yet at “Peace with Nature.”

“Species are still going extinct. We still use natural resources unsustainably. And we’ve still not collectively realized that, in the fight against climate change, our biggest ally is nature.”

What are the challenges?

Finance

Muhamad recognized that financing is crucial for “sustained” and secure resources for the future. She called on Parties to come forward and make firm commitments to finance biodiversity, although they have until 2025 to do so in terms of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.

The COP16 chairperson also hoped that this forum would be a “pioneer” for new financing mechanisms that go beyond relying on countries financing the framework and to “open new doors of possibilities for funding mechanisms that are more sustainable and that are at the scale of the challenge that we are facing.”

Business

Muhamad also referred to the proactive role of business with regard to their responsibilities towards keeping a safe environment and its contribution to biodiversity.

The framework mandates government remove, over time, subsidies to sectors of the economy that may impact biodiversity. This could lead to backlash, so human rights and fairness are crucial; however, there are also many opportunities.

“We hope at COP16 to bring a lot of inspiration from those business models that are already incorporated and taking nature as a design into consideration, and that are being the vanguard of new prospects.”

It is also crucial to make this a partnership between government and business to move forward and there will be opportunities in both the green and blue zones at COP16 to take the conversation forward.

Digital sequencing

Muhamad anticipates that the approval of a digital sequencing fund and the mechanism for implementation will be key achievements of the negotiations.

Schomaker added that it had already been “decided that there will be a new global mechanism for sharing the benefits of digital sequencing information on genetic resources, and that global mechanism includes a fund.” What is still under discussion is what form the fund will take.

“Will it be a new fund, a completely new fund, which is one of the options on the table, or will it be one of the existing funds that we have?”

David Cooper, CBD’s Deputy Executive Secretary , agreed that the discussion includes whether to use existing funds like the Global Biodiversity Fund, which is managed by the Global Environment Facility or create a new fund.

IPS UN Bureau Report