US Pullout Gives Upper Hand to Human Rights Abusers Worldwide

Posted on by admin

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

The UN General Assembly votes to suspend the rights of the membership of the Russian Federation in the Human Rights Council during an Emergency Special Session on Ukraine. April 2022. Credit: UN Photo/Manuel Elías

UNITED NATIONS, Feb 14 2025 (IPS) – When some of the world’s “authoritarian and repressive regimes” were elected as members of the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) –including Cuba, China, Russia, Kazakhstan and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) — a US Congressman Dana Rohrabacher infamously remarked: “The inmates have taken over the asylum, I don’t plan to give the lunatics any more American tax dollars to play with.”

That remark brought back memories of a 1975 award-winning Hollywood classic “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest”, with Jack Nicholson as a rebellious patient causing havoc at a US mental institution while leading a group of protesting inmates.

And last week, the US decided, metaphorically speaking, to fly over the cuckoo’s nest—and withdraw from the Geneva-based 47-member Human Rights Council.

https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/04/1115782

Dr. Simon Adams, President and CEO of the Center for Victims of Torture, told IPS the Human Rights Council and all United Nations bodies are better and stronger with the United States being actively engaged.

“Any state withdrawing from the HRC only encourages the dictators, torturers, and human rights abusers of the world. At this moment in history, with creeping authoritarianism and human rights under attack in so many parts of the world, the Human Rights Council remains indispensable,” he added.

UN Human Rights Council in session in Geneva. Credit: UN Photo/Elma Okic

Ambassador A.L.A. Azeez, a foreign policy commentator, who previously served as Sri Lanka’s Permanent Representative to the UN in Geneva, told IPS the United States’ withdrawal from the UNHRC is a counterproductive move that harms both US interests and the global cause of human rights.

This departure from a critical multilateral institution is unlikely to achieve transformative change within the council. It never happened with its previous withdrawals, nor may it happen now, with the current one, he pointed out.

What does it achieve then?

“It removes the US’s opportunity to engage constructively with members and stakeholders, contributing to the strengthening of human rights multilateralism. By exiting, the US forfeits its ability to shape the narrative, push for necessary reforms, and advocate for its values”.

Human rights multilateralism, he argued, depends on the engagement and collaboration of diverse nations. Not one state or a small group of states alone however influential they are!”

This withdrawal amounts to an abdication of shared responsibility for promoting and protecting human rights. It risks signaling a diminished US commitment to human rights, potentially eroding the international human rights system and damaging whatever credibility and moral authority the US has on the world stage, said Ambassador Azeez.

Periodic withdrawals from international bodies like the UNHRC severely damage the US’s image as a steadfast defender of human rights and multilateralism. The US cannot afford to project an image of selective engagement, perceived as contingent on the council’s alignment with US views.

This erosion of credibility hinders the US’s ability to lead by example and effectively champion human rights.

The primary motivation for the withdrawal seems to be concerns about bias against a close US ally in the Middle East. While such concerns are often expressed, is exiting the council the best solution? A more constructive approach would be to remain engaged and work to address perceived concerns from within.

While strategic calculations may drive the idea of disengagement from multilateral bodies, the era of unipolarity is over. Multilateralism must reassert itself, acting as a mediating force among competing geopolitical interests. The importance of remaining engaged in multilateral human rights efforts and driving meaningful change from within cannot be overstated, declared Ambassador Azeez.

Responding to a question at the UN press briefing February 4, UN Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric said: “It doesn’t alter our position on the importance of the Human Rights Council as part of the overall human rights architecture within the United Nations,” he said.

“And on UNRWA, I’m not sure that’s something that’s very new. I mean, and again, it doesn’t alter our commitment to supporting UNRWA in its work, and in its work of delivering critical services to Palestinians under its mandate,” said Dujarric.

Amanda Klasing, National Director, Government Relations & Advocacy with Amnesty International USA, said announcing that the United States is withdrawing from the Human Rights Council when it is not even a sitting member, is just the latest move by President Trump to demonstrate to the world his complete and blatant disregard for human rights and international cooperation — even if it weakens U.S. interests.

“Our world needs multilateral cooperation around shared interests, especially the protection of human rights. International institutions will continue to function, either with the U.S. or without it, but it seems that President Trump is uninterested in having a seat at that table to shape the norms and policies of the future, or even to protect the human rights of people in the United States”.

The HRC provides a global forum for governments to discuss human rights concerns, can authorize investigations that bring to light human rights violations, and, while not perfect, is a tool to hold governments accountable in fulfilling their human rights obligations, including to their own population.

President Trump’s performative decision to pull the U.S. out of the HRC, Klasing pointed out, signals to the rest of the world that the U.S. is happy to completely cede important decisions about human rights violations happening across the globe to other countries.

“This isn’t about President Trump thumbing his nose at the institution, instead he’s just demonstrating he’d rather make a callous show of rejecting human rights than do the work needed to protect and promote human rights for people everywhere, including in the U.S.”

https://www.amnestyusa.org/press-releases/u-s-withdrawal-from-un-human-rights-council-is-performative-disregard-for-human-rights/

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

Legal Amendments in Iraq Threaten Rights of Women and Girls

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Gender, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, Middle East & North Africa, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Credit: United Nations, Iraq

BEIRUT, Lebanon, Feb 12 2025 (IPS) – Efforts to end child marriage in Iraq are facing a serious threat, with the Iraqi Council of Representatives’ approval of amendments to Iraq’s Personal Status Law raising grave concerns that it risks permitting child marriage for girls.

These legal amendments would grant religious authorities in Iraq greater control over family matters such as marriage, divorce, inheritance, and the care of children by allowing clerics in Islamic Courts to rule on these in accordance with the clerics’ interpretations of Islamic law.

This includes permitting the marriage of minors according to the specific religious sect under which the marriage contract is conducted, meaning that the minimum age of marriage could be lowered below 18, and could vary between different religious denominations.

If this goes ahead, it would be a profound violation of human rights and risks undermining legal protections for women and girls, in direct contravention of international human rights commitments, including the Convention on the Rights of the Child, to which Iraq is a signatory.

It is important to note that these changes have not yet been made to Iraq’s personal status law. The amendment passed by the Iraqi Council of Representatives on January 21, 2025, only granted religious authorities the ability to interpret and potentially modify the law, but the alterations have not been implemented yet.

On February 4, Iraq’s Federal Supreme Court suspended implementation of the controversial bill after a number of members of parliament filed a complaint on the grounds that the voting process was illegal. This provides a crucial opportunity for continued advocacy, with the persistent efforts of civil society organizations already having a positive impact.

Now is a critical moment to join together in action to help safeguard and strengthen the rights of women and girls in Iraq, and prevent their fundamental human rights from being further eroded.

Child marriage puts girls at greater risk of harm

If the amendment is implemented, it could end a ban on the marriage of children under the age of 18 that has been in place In Iraq since 1959 – although this did include a provision allowing a child to be married with a judge’s consent.

In 2022, UNICEF reported that 28% of girls in Iraq were married under the age of 18, and 7% were married before they turned 15. Child marriage rates vary across different Iraqi regions, with the highest prevalence found in Missan (43.5%), Najaf (37.2%), and Karbalah (36.8%).

Legalizing child marriage under any pretext sets a dangerous precedent. It is not a cultural or religious necessity but a harmful practice that perpetuates cycles of poverty, illiteracy, and gender-based violence.

Marrying girls while they are still children puts them at greater risk of exploitation and is associated with higher rates of early and forced pregnancy, physical and sexual abuse, psychological trauma, and limited access to education, employment, and financial independence.

Women and girls need greater protection in personal status laws

Personal status laws govern some of the most intimate aspects of family relationships, such as marriage, divorce, child custody, inheritance, and property ownership. In many countries, these laws are deeply rooted in discriminatory traditions that prioritize the rights of men and boys over women and girls.

As a result, women and girls in Iraq, and in many other countries, continue to face significant challenges due to sex discrimination written into personal status laws.

Reforming this type of legislation has proved to be one of the most intractable areas of legal change because laws governing family relationships are deeply intertwined with beliefs about religion, tradition, and culture.

The weakening of legal protections for women and girls in Iraq reflects a disturbing global trend. Around the world, efforts to roll back laws that protect women’s and girls’ rights are gaining momentum, putting millions at risk of child and forced marriage, sexual and gender-based violence, and forced pregnancy due to curtailed access to reproductive healthcare.

Collaborating to protect women’s and girls’ legal rights

The proposed amendments to Iraq’s Personal Status Law threaten to normalize harmful practices like child marriage, potentially undermining decades of progressive reform that established greater safeguards for women and girls and helped unify the country’s family law provisions.

As the United Nations in Iraq has highlighted in its statement released in response to recent developments, legal reforms must “align with Iraq’s international human rights commitments, particularly in relation to safeguarding the rights and well-being of women and children, in a way that meets the aspirations of the Iraqi people and preserves the country’s historic achievements and gains.”

Women’s rights supporters are united in opposition to harmful legal reforms that endanger the rights of women and girls across the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). Local advocates in Iraq are collaborating alongside leading MENA women’s rights organizations as part of the Hurra Coalition, which seeks to reform family laws at national and regional levels in compliance with international human rights standards.

Through evidence-based advocacy and survivor-centered approaches, Hurra Coalition members are building a regional movement to protect girls’ rights within the family, their safety, and autonomy over their futures.

This includes calling for comprehensive family law reforms that uphold and advance equality, ensure safety, and guarantee access to justice for all, without discrimination. We urge the global community to support the human rights of Iraqi women and girls by amplifying advocacy and promoting their protection.

Governments, lawmakers, and global institutions must stand firm in upholding the legal rights of women and girls to safeguard them from harm in Iraq and in all countries around the world.

Dr. Dima Dabbous is Equality Now’s Regional Representative in the Middle East and North Africa

Equality Now is an international human rights organization dedicated to protecting and promoting the rights of all women and girls worldwide. Its work is organized around four main program areas: Achieving Legal Equality, Ending Sexual Violence, Ending Harmful Practices, and Ending Sexual Exploitation, with a cross-cutting focus on the unique challenges facing adolescent girls.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Not an Option. A Call for Action

Posted on by admin

Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, Climate Change, Education, Education Cannot Wait. Future of Education is here, Human Rights, Humanitarian Emergencies

NEW YORK, Feb 11 2025 – A global alert is not an option. It requires global action. Over the past three years, the number of crisis-impacted school-aged children in need of urgent quality education support has grown by an alarming 35 million, according to Education Cannot Wait’s new Global Estimates Report.

The recently published report offers a stark and brutal alert for the future of 234 million girls and boys enduring the frontlines of the world’s most dire humanitarian crises. Their access to a quality education is non-existent. We cannot stand by and let the consequences avalanche into a total collapse. They desperately need our urgent collective global action, now.

The complex and horrific disruption of education in Gaza, the Eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, Sudan, Ukraine and beyond are utterly dangerous and harmful to them and all of us. Without action, we are pushing even more children into harm’s way. Without a quality education, we risk repeating cycles of displacement, instability, insecurity, uncertainty, chaos and mayhem. We risk leaving an entire generation behind. This will have severe impact on their lives, as well as all our lives.

Education Cannot Wait (ECW) and all our partners – be it strategic donors, the private sector, ministries of education, UN agencies, civil society and local communities – have proven again and again that it is indeed possible to make a difference and a bold impact. It is indeed possible to extinguish the fire, reduce the speed of the avalanche and turn challenges into opportunities. In just a few years, we jointly and collectively delivered a continued quality education to over 11 million children and adolescents in the harshest circumstances on earth.

With more funding, we could double that number in just over a year. With even more funding, we can and will eventually become a collective force of nature that makes sure that every child and young person in crises reaches their potential. When they reach their potential through a quality education, they will be the force of nature for their societies and the world at large, be it in science, in business, as highly-qualified teachers, or any other profession that every society needs to thrive and make an impact.

The needs have never been greater. At the same time, the evidenced-based model for success has never been stronger. This is not the time to fear to fail, nor for closing our eyes to the reality, or the power of education to resolve it.

This is an investment in the human potential at its best. It is an investment in stronger economies and greater stability across the globe. No one loses. All are winners.

According to the United Nations, there is a US$100 billion annual financing gap to achieve the education targets in low- and lower-middle income countries. ECW is calling for a tiny part of that figure to make a major impact. That is US$600 million to deliver on the goals outlined in our four-year strategic plan: to reach 20 million crisis-impacted children and adolescents.

The need for collaboration has never been more important. In January, ECW and our close strategic partner the Global Partnership for Education (GPE) issued a Complementarity Note that underscores the value-addition of our individual organizations and charts a path toward increased results, impact, coordination and collaboration. We ensure that there is no duplication, nor double funding. Rather, we provide a holistic approach based on each other’s comparative advantage. The same applies for the third funding mechanism of IFFEd, the International Finance Facility for Education. With the resources required, these three funds work with all our partners to deliver comprehensively and completely. It is possible.

In Sudan, for example, recent analysis from OCHA indicates that of the 4.2 million targeted through the humanitarian response toward education, only 777,000 have been reached thus far, and of the US$131 million humanitarian funding ask for education, only US$22.8 million has been funded thus far. That is an 83% funding gap.

It is astonishing considering that education is both lifesaving and has the power to reduce aid-dependency in the long run. Now, more than ever, we need to step up funding for education in emergencies and protracted crises. Humanitarian, development, public and private sector funding can make a huge contribution to address the vicious cycle of humanitarian crises.

We should make no mistake: the children and adolescents in crises are extremely resilient due to their soul-shattering experiences. Once they get an education, they will certainly tap into extraordinary innovation, unbreakable courage and a limitless source of creativity. Then, they will show us how to make the impossible possible.

In conclusion, we need to connect the dots and see the whole picture. Climate change is no less of a major factor in disrupting education than conflict. Indeed, conflicts, climate change and forced displacement are all interconnected humanitarian crises. In this month’s high-level interview, we discuss the connection between education and climate change with ECW’s Climate Champion Adenike Oladosu. Funding climate change demands funding education, too. We cannot afford to separate the two.

Or, as the multi-faceted Leonardo da Vinci once said: “Learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.”

The 234 million children and adolescents deprived of a quality education are connected to 8 billion people, our future as a human species and the progress of our world. Making an investment requires us to see the whole picture. It is not an option. It is a call for action.

Yasmine Sherif is Executive Director of Education Cannot Wait

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Belarus: A Sham Election That Fools No One

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Europe, Featured, Headlines, Human Rights, Nuclear Energy – Nuclear Weapons, Press Freedom, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Credit: Sergei Gapon/AFP via Getty Images

LONDON, Feb 7 2025 (IPS) – Alexander Lukashenko will soon begin his seventh term as president of Belarus. The official result of the 26 January election gave him 86.8 per cent of the vote, following an election held in a climate of fear. Only token opposition candidates were allowed, most of who came out in support of Lukashenko. Anyone who might have offered a credible challenge is in jail or in exile.

No repeat of 2020

In office since 1994 as the so far only president of independent Belarus, Lukashenko is by far Europe’s longest-serving head of state. The 1994 vote that brought the former Soviet official to power was the country’s only legitimate election. Each since has been designed to favour Lukashenko.

He only faced a serious threat in 2020, when an outsider candidate, Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, was able to run a campaign that captured the popular imagination. Lukashenko’s response was to arrest opponents, repress protests, restrict the internet, deny access for electoral observers and then blatantly steal the election.

When people took to the street in mass protests against electoral fraud, Belarus seemed on the brink of a democratic revolution. But Lukashenko’s government launched a brutal defence, using security forces to violently attack protesters and arresting over a thousand people. It dissolved opposition political parties and raided and shut down civil society organisations: over a thousand have been forcibly liquidated since 2020.

Lukashenko’s regime has gone after those in exile, kidnapping and allegedly killing Belarusians abroad. Belarus is among the 10 states most engaged in transnational repression. They authorities have also deprived the estimated 300,000 people who’ve fled since 2020 of their ability to vote.

By embracing repression, Lukashenko made a choice to abandon his policy of balancing between the European Union (EU) and Russia. When the EU imposed sanctions in response to the 2020 election fraud, Russia offered a package of loans. In 2022, when Russia launched its full-scale assault on Ukraine, some of its forces entered Ukraine from Belarus.

Shortly after Russia began its full-scale invasion, a constitutional referendum held in Belarus, marked by the same lack of democracy as its elections, formally ended the country’s neutrality and non-nuclear status. In December 2024, the two states signed a security treaty allowing the use of Russian nuclear weapons in the event of aggression against Belarus, and Lukashenko confirmed that the country hosts dozens of Russian nuclear warheads.

Belarus has also been accused of instrumentalising migrants to try to destabilise neighbouring countries. In 2021, it relaxed its visa rules for people from Middle Eastern and North African countries and encouraged flights to Belarus. Thousands were taken to the borders with Lithuania and Poland and left to try to cross them in desperate conditions, freezing and without essentials, subjected to security force violence on both sides. Migrants were unwitting pawns in Lukashenko’s game to strike back at his neighbours. Attempted crossings and human rights violations have continued since.

Renewed crackdown

Just to be on the safe side, Lukashenko launched another crackdown in the months leading up to the election. The intent was clearly to ensure there’d be no repeat of the expression of opposition and protests of 2020.

Starting in July 2024, Lukashenko pardoned around 250 political prisoners, releasing them from jail. His likely aim was to soften international criticism in the run-up to the vote. But these weren’t the high-profile prisoners serving long sentences, such as Nobel Peace Prize winner Ales Bialiatski, a founder of the Viasna Human Rights Centre, who received a 10-year sentence in 2023, or protest leader Maria Kolesnikova, sentenced to 11 years in 2021. Those pardoned had to publicly acknowledge their guilt and repent.

The freed jail spaces were quickly filled, with over a hundred friends and relatives of political prisoners detained. In February 2024, authorities detained at least 12 lawyers who’d defended political prisoners. In December, they arrested seven independent journalists. Belarus has the world’s fourth highest number of jailed journalists.

People have been jailed merely for following Telegram channels deemed ‘extremist’ or making social media comments. Over 1,700 people reportedly faced charges for political activities in 2024. Prison conditions are harsh. People may be forced to do hard labour, kept in solitary confinement, sent to freezing punishment cells, denied access to their families and have medical care withheld.

On election day, Lukashenko’s dictatorial style was on full display. He held a press conference where he promised to ‘deal with’ opposition activists in exile and said they were endangering their families in Belarus, adding that some opponents ‘chose’ to go to prison. He also didn’t rule out the prospect of running for an eighth term in 2030.

Time for change

Lukashenko promises more of the same: continuing autocracy and closed civic space. For generations of Belarusians who’ve known nothing but his rule, and with opposition voices so ruthlessly suppressed, it may be hard to imagine anything else. The possibilities opened up in 2020 have been ruthlessly shut down.

But the wheels of history will keep turning, and the 70-year-old dictator won’t last forever. Some kind of cessation of hostilities in Ukraine may well come this year, forcing Lukashenko to make friends beyond Vladimir Putin. If Russia winds down its booming war economy, the ensuing economic shock in Belarus, which largely depends on Russia, could trigger public anger.

Meanwhile, potentially increased scrutiny could come from the International Criminal Court: in September 2024, the government of Lithuania requested an investigation into crimes against humanity allegedly committed by Belarusian authorities. If this move gains momentum, Lukashenko could find himself in an uncomfortable spotlight. States could also intensify sanctions: Canada and the UK have done so following the election.

If Belarus attempts to reengage with them, democratic states should insist that no thaw in relations is possible without tangible human rights progress . This should start with the release of all political prisoners, guarantees for the safety of exiled activists and a reversal of attacks on civic space.

Andrew Firmin is CIVICUS Editor-in-Chief, co-director and writer for CIVICUS Lens and co-author of the State of Civil Society Report.

For interviews or more information, please contact research@civicus.org.

  Source

U.S. White House Executive Order Raises Concerns for Its Support to the UN

Posted on by admin

Aid, Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, Development & Aid, Editors’ Choice, Featured, Headlines, Human Rights, Humanitarian Emergencies, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Humanitarian Emergencies

Coly Seck (at microphone), Chair of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People and Permanent Representative of the Republic of Senegal to the United Nations, briefs reporters with Members of the newly-elected Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People (CEIRPP Bureau). At fourth from right is Riyad Mansour, Permanent Observer of the State of Palestine to the United Nations. Credit: UN Photo: Manuel Elías

Coly Seck (at microphone), Chair of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People and Permanent Representative of the Republic of Senegal to the United Nations, briefs reporters with Members of the newly-elected Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People (CEIRPP Bureau). At fourth from right is Riyad Mansour, Permanent Observer of the State of Palestine to the United Nations. Credit: UN Photo: Manuel Elías

UNITED NATIONS, Feb 6 2025 (IPS) – A new executive order from the United States White House calls for withdrawing support from major UN entities and a review of all international intergovernmental organizations which the United States is a member of. The U.S.’s orders against the UN Palestine Refugee Agency also do not bode well for ongoing ceasefire negotiations in Gaza.

President Donald Trumps comments that the “US will take over the Gaza Strip and we will do a job with it, too. We’ll own it,” have also been widely criticized.

On Tuesday, the White House issued an executive order, where they announced that they will pull out from the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) effective immediately and called for a review of its membership in UN and other intergovernmental organizations. The executive order singles out other UN entities that needed “further scrutiny”—the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA); and the UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). The executive order suspended all funding to these organizations.

The executive order also cites that UNESCO has failed to address “mounting arrears” and reform, also noting that it has demonstrated anti-Israeli sentiments over the last decade. A review of the U.S.’s membership in UNESCO would assess whether it supports the country’s interests, and would include an analysis of anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli sentiment within the organization.

The United States announced that no funds or grants would go towards the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), citing corruption within the organization and the infiltration of terrorist groups such as Hamas.

UN Secretary-General Spokesperson Stéphane Dujarric told reporters on Tuesday that in light of the United States’ decision, this would not change the UN’s “commitment to supporting UNRWA in its work”, or the HRC’s importance as a part of the “overall human rights architecture within the United Nations”.

“It has been clear for us that U.S. support for the United Nations has saved countless lives and global security,” said Dujarric. “The Secretary-General is looking forward to speaking with President (Donald) Trump, he looks forward to continuing what was a very, I think, frank and productive relationship during the first term. He looks to strengthening the relationship in the turbulent times that we live in.”

On Wednesday the newly-elected chair of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, Ambassador Coly Seck, Permanent Representative of Senegal, told a told a press conference that it condemned the ban by Israel on UNWRA .

“We strongly condemn Israel’s ban UNWRA which obstructs vital humanitarian cooperation in direct violation of the UN mandate and General Assembly resolutions in stabilizing the ceasefire and supporting Gaza’s recovery. This ban imposed immediately after the ceasefire, deal will deepen Gaza suffering.”

The suspension of aid funding from the United States is already impacting humanitarian operations across different agencies. Dujarric said that the U.S. had committed 15 million USD to the trust fund, of which 1.7 million has already been spent. This leaves 13.3 million frozen and unusable at this time.

Pio Smith, Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific, United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) told reporters in Geneva that they had to suspend the programs funded by US grants, which included funds that were already committed to the agency. Smith warned that the lack of funding would impact programs in places such as Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh. Worldwide, more than half of UNFPA’s facilities, 596 out of 982, would be impacted by this funding pause.

Vivian van de Perre, the Deputy Head of its UN Mission to the Democratic Republic of the Congo, told reporters in New York on Wednesday that the recent pause in funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has forced humanitarian partners on the ground to suspend their work. “…Many of the partners, including IOM (the International Organization for Migration), which is a key partner for us, need to stop their work due to the USAID stop-work order,” she said.

The executive order, along with Trump’s announcement that the U.S. would move into and claim Gaza cast a shadow of doubt over ongoing ceasefire negotiations.

UN Human Rights Commissioner Volker Türk said that the priority now must be to move to the next phase of the ceasefire, which calls for the release of all hostages and arbitrarily detained prisoners, an end to the war, and the reconstruction of Gaza.

“The suffering of people in the [occupied Palestinian territories] and Israel has been unbearable. Palestinians and Israelis need peace and security, on the basis of full dignity and equality,” Türk said in a statement. “International law is very clear. The right to self-determination is a fundamental principle of international law and must be protected by all States, as the International Court of Justice recently underlined afresh. Any forcible transfer in or deportation of people from occupied territory is strictly prohibited.”

The forcible removal of 2.2 million Palestinians from Gaza that Trump is calling for has been decried and been called a violation of international humanitarian law.

“Any forced displacement of people is tantamount to ethnic cleansing,” said Dujarric when asked about Trump’s remarks. “…In our search for solutions, we must not make the problem worse. Whatever solutions we find need to be rooted in the bedrock of international law.”

Riyad Mansour, Permanent Observer of the State of Palestine to the United Nations, briefing reporters after the opening session of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, added his condemnation of Trump’s plan.

Mansour said with regard to the idea of “kicking the Palestinian people out from the Gaza Strip, I just want to tell you that during the last 24 hours, statements from heads of states, of Egypt, of Jordan, of the State of Palestine, of Saudi Arabia and many countries, including countries who spoke in the debate in the room behind us during the meeting of the committee, condemn these efforts.”

He said Trump’s plan has been met with a “global consensus on not allowing forced transfer to take place, ethnic cleansing to take place. We Palestinians love every part of the State of Palestine. We love the Gaza Strip. It is part of our DNA.”

The march of Palestinians from the south to the north of the Gaza Strip following the ceasefire was proof of the people’s committment to rebuild their own homes, Mansour said.

“More than 400,000 of them to go to the rubbles in the northern Gaza in order to start cleaning around their destroyed homes.”

At the White House, Trump’s aids attempted a row back on his comments. Secretary of State Marco Rubio reportedly told journalists that it Trump was proposing to rebuil Gaza, and his press secretary Karoline Leavitt, said “the president has not committed to putting boots on the ground in Gaza.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

Pakistan: Freedom of Expression at Stake With New Cybercrime Law

Posted on by admin

Asia-Pacific, Civil Society, Democracy, Editors’ Choice, Featured, Freedom of Expression, Headlines, Human Rights, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Freedom of Expression

Pakistani journalists speak out about cybercrimes law from left to right Hamid Mir, Munazza Siddiqui and Umar Cheema. Credits: Jang News, and TikTok

Pakistani journalists speak out about cybercrimes law from left to right Hamid Mir, Munazza Siddiqui and Umar Cheema. Credits: Jang News, and TikTok

KARACHI, Feb 5 2025 (IPS) – “I may not be able to continue hosting my show because the content I put up will most certainly land me in prison,” said senior correspondent Azaz Syed who works for a private TV channel, but who also has his own private online digital channel. He was referring to the recent amendment in the already existing cybercrime law, terming it a “wild” law which has been instituted to grapple with fake news among other online harms.

The new version—Prevention of Electronic Crimes (Amendment) Act, 2025—passed hurriedly, within a week, in both the houses without debate, and signed into a law by President Asif Ali Zardari on January 29, has triggered nationwide protests by the country’s media personnel.

“They have taken away my right to freedom of expression,” Syed told IPS.

“I fail to understand the uproar among journalists working in electronic media. They already have PEMRA, [the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority] which is responsible for facilitating and regulating private electronic media,” said Minister for Information and Broadcasting Atta­ullah Tarar. “This law is to regulate the social media and countries across the world have some codes or standards under which social media operate; but there was none in our country.”

He said the existing authority, which is the Federal Investigation Authority, that looked into cybercrimes seemed ill-equipped to handle the expanding nature of online crimes taking place—harassment, pornography, national security threats, spreading economic uncertainty; just look at the conviction rate, which is dismal,” he defended the amendment.

Tarar’s reference to the “uproar” stems from TV journalists, like Syed, who have gigs on online platforms and fear the restrictions on content imposed by PECA.

For the past two years, Syed has been hosting a popular show on YouTube called Talk Shock, focusing on sensitive topics like the Pakistan army, intelligence agencies, blasphemy laws, persecution of Ahmadis, and forced conversions of Hindu girls. He described it as a passion project addressing issues close to his heart, despite potential disapproval from authorities. His show has gained over eight million viewers and 174,000 followers, also providing him with extra income.

Hamid Mir, host of Capital Talk, one of the oldest and highest-rated political talk shows, launched his digital TV channel on YouTube after being banned from TV in 2021 (he had already been banned twice, in 2007 by military dictator Pervez Musharraf  and in 2008 by the ruling Pakistan People’s Party) for  speaking against the country’s powerful military for persecuting journalists. “I share my opinions there when I am unable to on the channel that I’m employed in. Having your own platform is liberating,” he told IPS. He has 263,000 viewers.

Azaz Syed, who has his digital TV programme on YouTube called Talk Shock. Credit: Azaz Syed

Azaz Syed, who has his digital TV programme on YouTube called Talk Shock. Credit: Azaz Syed

Mir’s greater worry though is the possibility of losing his voice on X, where he connects with over eight million followers. “If I can’t speak my mind, it will have a profound impact on me,” he said.

But even those journalists who otherwise feel social media is being misused find the law distasteful.

“I have zero tolerance for fake news, and am all for regulating the beast that social media has become, but not this way, certainly” said senior investigative journalist, Umar Cheema, terming it a “third class” law.

The law was originally passed in 2016, by the same ruling party that has brought the current amendments – the Pakistan Muslim League-N. It had been met with much criticism even then.

“The reason for the need for the law given back in 2016 was to counter hate speech, terrorist content and harassment of women—this time the ruse is fake news,” said Farieha Aziz’s co-founder of Bolo Bhi, an advocacy forum for digital rights. The suspicion and criticism against the law now and then is the same—the government is using this law to “stifle political dissent and rein in freedom of expression” she said.

The amendment to the law, criminalises fake news and its dissemination with a prison term of up to three years and a fine of up to Rs 2 million (about USD 7,200).

But, pointed out Aziz, the concern went beyond just the penalties associated with the amendment to the law—it is the “potential for misuse” in the process of determining what constitutes fake news. “People will be reluctant to share or even discuss information out of fear that it might be deemed false or harmful, leading to criminal charges,” she explained, adding the definition of fake news was vague and broad. “They have created a vagueness through the use of language taken from the anti-terrorism act, around the offence,” she pointed out.

“The government operates in grey areas and likes to keep people in a state of confusion,” agreed Cheema.

Moreover, pointed out, Munazza Siddiqui, senior producer on a private TV channel: “The law is unconstitutional as it violates the fundamental right to freedom, a core principle enshrined in our Constitution.” She uses TikTok, a platform predominantly used for putting up entertaining content, for disseminating news and opinions. “It’s popular with young people but works superbly for me as they are my audience. The millennials and Gen Z want to stay informed about the world around them, but they lack the patience to sit through long articles or watch lengthy news segments on TV. I provide them with both in just a minute or so!”

However, Siddiqui acknowledged that her vlogging might be impacted. With the sword of Damocles hanging over her, in the form of the newly revised cyber law, she said, “We already navigate a space of self-censorship, and now there’s an added layer of fear.”

The law establishes four bodies—the Social Media Protection and Regulatory Authority, the Social Media Complaints Council, the Social Media Protection Tribunal, and the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency—concentrating significant power. Aziz warned that these bodies, appointed by the federal government, could lack independence, creating potential conflicts of interest and undermining fairness and accountability.

“And the window of appeal has also been closed as I can only go to the Supreme Court of Pakistan,” said Azaz, which was an expensive route to prove your innocence.

Although the 2016 cybercrime law was already considered draconian by experts, the reason to tweak it further, explained Cheema, was that “the nature and use of social media has changed and become more sophisticated since then, adding that the media needed to share the blame for the recent shape the law has taken.

Cheema said the media did not establish a code of conduct for responsible social media use which led the government to step in, using the fake news excuse to silence dissenting voices. He emphasized that while media can express opinions, facts must be solid, and journalists should hold each other accountable. “Yet, we don’t even call out our colleagues for lying.”

Finding the nationwide protest hypocritical, he questioned, “The bill wasn’t a surprise—everyone knew it was being revised. Why didn’t anyone speak up then? Where were the protests and revisions when it was in the National Assembly and Senate? There was silence, and now, after it’s law, they’re out on the streets.”

“The law is in place,” Tarrar said with finality. However, he added: “The rules are still being worked out, and we’re open to media input to refine them.”

“Recalling the law may be tough,” agreed Cheema, but if the media is concerned, “They can come up with their own system; no one is stopping them; but that’s the real test for our community.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source