Stand Up, Speak Out: A Global Call to Men on the 25th Anniversary of International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women

Posted on by admin

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

Opinion

Credit: UN Women

LONDON, Nov 22 2024 (IPS) – In 1960, the Rafael Trujillo regime in the Dominican Republic assassinated the Mirabal sisters— renowned and respected for their courage and activism against dictatorship. To give their senseless violent death some meaning and to preserve their legacy, in 1999, the United Nations inaugurated November 25—the day of their assassination—as the International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women (EVAW).

When talk of violence against women (VAW) was still taboo in polite and political circles, the UN’s stance was powerful. It put a spotlight on a pervasive pandemic of violence evident across continents and cultures that caused devastation in the lives of millions and replicated itself across generations.

The assumption was that raising public awareness and creating a political platform—a global one, no less—would prompt attention, concern, action, and genuine political will to address and eliminate this preventable form of harm and trauma.

Unfulfilled Promise of Global Initiatives

In the subsequent years, other high-profile, largely performative, initiatives followed. UN events became annual feel-good rituals, sidelining seasoned women’s rights advocates in favor of celebrity-driven initiatives.

UN Women’s campaigns, such as actress Nicole Kidman’s “Say No-UNiTE to End Violence Against Women,” featuring stern Wonder Woman-inspired imagery on reusable bottles, raised funds but did little to reach perpetrators of violence. Emma Watson’s HeforShe seemed to admonish women for excluding men—despite decades of efforts to engage men in tackling violence.

Iceland even hosted an all-male “barbershop” conference to address equality, with limited impact. Similarly, UK Foreign Secretary William Hague garnered attention with grand declarations about ending wartime rape through the UK-led Prevention of Sexual Violence Initiative (PSVI), backed by long-time activist and actress Angelina Jolie.

But his premise that sexual violence in war would be prevented if cases were documented and perpetrators faced the future prospect of criminal justice, missed fundamental facts – including that to stop war-time rape, more focus and resources should be put on preventing wars.

Meanwhile, the top-down international attention barely made a dent in addressing the problem where it resided worldwide: in communities and homes, and increasingly online—especially in times of crisis and conflict. In large part, the lack of impact of these high-level initiatives was their failure to reach the right audiences with the right messages through trusted messengers.

Relying on Hollywood actresses to inspire largely women’s audiences to unite against violence may be necessary for motivating women, but it is not sufficient. When the perpetrators of violence are overwhelmingly male, strategies, messaging, policies, and programs must also be directed at men.

Implicitly acknowledging that world leaders did not care about the social and human cost of violence against women, the World Bank took a different tack: following the money. In 2014, the Bank reported that violence against women cost countries up to 3.4% of their GDP.1 In some countries, this was more than double their investments in education.

Implying that we should care about violence against women because it affects our bottom line is certainly a mercenary approach, but even this stark calculation failed to prompt a change in policies, practices, or prioritization of the elimination of violence against women (EVAW) as a socio-economic and security concern.

Countless diplomats, activists and bureaucrats have shaped new policies and resolutions at national and international levels. A transnational bureaucracy has grown around the agenda and EVAW has gone global with the “16 Days of Activism” campaign. Yet, 25 years later, the outlook remains grim.

We know that in Gaza women endure caesareans without anesthesia because of the Israeli blockade on food, water, electricity, and medication—but nothing is being done to prevent it. We know that in Sudan, women and girls face extreme sexual violence and rape, yet nothing is being done to prevent this violence or provide protection and care for survivors.

We saw how the COVID-19 pandemic prompted a spike of some 40% in domestic violence across the world—and yet, nothing is being done to acknowledge or deal with the issues systemically. Year after year, femicide persists. Between March 2023-2024, in the UK alone, 100 women were killed by men.

Multifaceted Solutions

Breaking the silence on violence against women through awareness-raising campaigns has certainly drawn attention to the issue. We now have increased reporting, with better data on the forms of violence and the victims and survivors. We have an increased trickle of funding for programming and, perhaps most importantly, we have clear evidence of what works. It is not surprising that the solutions are multifaceted.

Laws and policies matter. In France, as the Gisele Pelicot case reveals, the legal definition of rape matters. Similarly, changing institutional cultures matters, especially in male-dominated law enforcement. In the U.S., a 2020 study found that one in four women will experience sexual assault in their lifetime, but fewer than 5% of survivors report the assaults to law enforcement.

In the U.S., police code 20% of reported cases as “unfounded,” based on the reporting officers’ perceptions of the woman reporting the incident. The 2020 report notes that “dismissing sexual violence has become common practice amongst the police.”2 Training and changing police practices is therefore essential to bring perpetrators to justice and increase women’s trust in the service.

Globally, grassroots initiatives prove that impactful change begins with local security personnel and community leaders. At the International Civil Society Action Network (ICAN), we have supported many of our partners in the Women’s Alliance for Security Leadership (WASL) in their efforts.

In Sri Lanka, the Association of War Affected Women (AWAW) successfully advocated for deploying female police officers to rural areas, trained male and female police officers on international laws such as UN Security Council Resolution 1325 and encouraged them to develop culturally effective approaches to addressing VAW.

In a Syrian refugee community in Turkey, our partner Kareemat has led interventions to stop child marriages that often take place because they are “one less mouth to feed.” Since fathers are making these decisions, raising awareness of the risks to their daughters and offering livelihood alternatives is essential.

To ensure the message resonates, Kareemat engaged trusted male religious leaders to emphasize that child marriage contradicts Islamic values and harms young girls. They also advocate for continued education and provide skills training, supporting girls to have their own livelihoods.

“We have observed a positive shift among many beneficiaries, especially men…agreeing on the importance of waiting until a girl reaches the age of eighteen before marriage,” says Kareemat Founder, Najla Sheikh. “These men also advocated for preparing young women by equipping them with a profession that enables them to support themselves…The beneficiaries expressed a desire to see girls achieve financial independence and be able to protect themselves in a safe environment like Kareemat.”3

Efforts to engage men in communities has expanded over the years. But as UK-based investigative journalist Sonia Sodha wrote in 2022,4 when it comes to the seriously violent, awareness and education is just not enough; reflecting on the differences between and within men is also essential.

Sodha highlights the UK-based project, Drive, which “has shed once and for all the feminist attachment to the idea that the key to reducing serious violence is teaching men to be better.” The project works with high-risk domestic abusers, assigning them case managers to provide support with jobs, mental health, and housing, while also serving as early warning conduits to involve police and social services when necessary to disrupt violence.

The results are astounding with an 82% and 88% drop in physical and sexual abuse respectively. Yet, access remains severely limited, with only 1% of serious abusers receiving such intervention.5

Meanwhile, a consistent factor in men’s violence is their own exposure to violence as children. Childhood abuse is a leading precursor of adult violence, yet in rich and poorer countries, programs to protect children are being slashed. As the wars in Gaza and Yemen show, children are increasingly the key targets of violent conflict.

Violence Against Women Amidst War and Displacement

With 56 wars raging and over 120 million people displaced by conflict, violence against women is on the rise, in increasingly complex forms. Ukraine is a case in point. Ukrainian men have become soldiers at the frontlines fighting Russian forces to protect their families and homeland.

But too often, on leave, they mete out their own trauma against their wives and children. It is wretchedly heartbreaking, yet universal in contexts of crisis and conflict.6 Simultaneously, displacement and economic hardship forces more women into sex work, trafficking, and other situations that heighten their vulnerability. Political dealmaking, such as the U.S.-Taliban agreement, has fueled multi-generational violence against women and children.

Over half a century since the Mirabals’ assassination, as a global community, we are certainly more aware of the horrors of violence against women. But it is still women who are picking up the pieces.

Our support networks are critical, says South African activist Bernedette Muthein, recalling “the street groups that intervene during domestic violence” and the women-led organizations that provide advice, support, and exit plans that “include stashing identity documents, clothes and money.”

Shelters and women-only spaces also remain essential for victims. But in Liberia, says peacebuilder Cerue Garlo “such issues are still not seen as national issues. The public expects women to handle them as ‘women’s issues’,” a sentiment that resonates around the world.

Time to Break the Cycle

On November 25, 2024, as the UN commemorates the 25th anniversary of the International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women, perhaps it is worth stating it explicitly: violence against women is not just a women’s issue. It is a societal, economic, and security issue. Given the vast majority of perpetrators are men, it is also very clearly a men’s issue.

At a minimum, it is time to shift the shame and fear that women have harbored for so long, onto the men who perpetuate the violence. Too often, when such calls are made, social media platforms are flooded with #NotAllMen. Of course, not all men are implicated in VAW—and this is precisely the point. It is time for the good men—those who are indignant about and abhor such violence—to stand up, speak out, and join women to take on the challenge of ending this pandemic.

It is also time to dedicate more funding and channel resources directly to the women’s organizations working to tackle the roots, symptoms, causes, and effects of such violence.

The good news is that when the most serious abusers in the UK can be stopped, and destitute Syrian fathers can be convinced to protect their daughters, we know that violence against women is not inevitable. We just need to muster up the political will, social courage, and economic resources. Let’s not wait another 25 years to make the promise of ending violence against women a reality.

1 https://www.worldbank.org/en/results/2023/08/25/tackling-gender-based-violence-development-imperative
2 https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9136376/
3 Personal correspondence
4 https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/mar/06/male-violence-against-women-much-more-than-toxic-masculinity
5 Ibid
6 https://gppi.net/media/Kotliuk_2024_Hidden-Front-of-Russias-War_ENG.pdf

Sanam Naraghi Anderlini, MBE, is Founder/CEO, International Civil Society Action Network (ICAN)

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Breaking Cycle of Violence to Save Mothers & Children: Why Ending Gender-Based Violence is Essential for Global Health

Posted on by admin

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

Opinion

Pioneering effort to protect women and children in quarantine centres in Viet Nam Credit: UN Women

GENEVA, Nov 21 2024 (IPS) – Each year, millions of women and children around the world die from preventable causes. Maternal, newborn, and child health (MNCH) is a shared global priority, yet we often overlook one of its most pressing—and preventable—barriers: violence against women.

As we mark the 16 Days of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence, we are reminded that gender-based violence (GBV) is not just a social issue but a critical health crisis that endangers the lives of mothers and children everywhere.

When we consider that a woman experiencing violence is 1.5 times more likely to have a low-birth-weight baby and that this condition greatly increases infant mortality, the need for urgent, integrated action becomes starkly clear. 1 Addressing violence is not peripheral to MNCH efforts—it is foundational.

Violence and Health: A Devastating Cycle

Evidence tells us that intimate partner violence (IPV) directly affects maternal and infant outcomes. Pregnant women subjected to IPV face a heightened risk of complications like preterm labor and hemorrhage, often resulting in increased maternal and newborn mortality.2 3 The problem doesn’t end with pregnancy: children born to mothers experiencing violence have a higher likelihood of malnutrition, stunting, and developmental delays, perpetuating a cycle of vulnerability. 4

The psychological toll is just as concerning. Women subjected to violence are more prone to depression and anxiety, both of which affect maternal health-seeking behavior.5 Depressed mothers are less likely to access antenatal care and postnatal services, further endangering the lives of their infants. In turn, these mental health impacts lead to cascading health and social risks for women and their families, affecting entire communities.

Rajat Khosla

The Crisis Within Crises: Humanitarian Settings

Nowhere are these challenges more pressing than in humanitarian settings. Conflict, natural disasters, and displacement magnify the vulnerability of women and children, often leading to spikes in sexual violence and the breakdown of healthcare systems. In conflict zones, over 60% of women report having experienced sexual violence, according to humanitarian reports. 6 These women are not only at risk of severe trauma and infection but also of maternal mortality, with rates nearly double those found in stable environments. 7

It’s estimated that more than 500 women and girls die every day from preventable complications related to pregnancy and childbirth in humanitarian settings,8 underscoring an urgent need for an integrated approach to MNCH and GBV response. These statistics are more than numbers—they represent the lives of mothers, daughters, and children who deserve health, safety, and dignity.

The Overlooked Victims: Women Health Care Workers

It’s not only patients who suffer. Female health workers, the backbone of MNCH services worldwide, are often at grave risk. In fragile and conflict-affected settings, women health workers face high rates of violence, including harassment and physical assault.

Research suggests that up to 80% of healthcare workers in these settings report experiencing violence, a statistic that directly impacts their ability to provide care.9 High rates of violence lead to burnout, turnover, and a critical shortage of trauma-informed healthcare providers when they are needed most.10

For many, this threat is exacerbated by their roles as frontline responders to gender-based violence. The safety and mental health of our healthcare workforce are inextricably linked to the health outcomes we aim to achieve for mothers and children.

A Call to Action for Integrated Policies

    As we look to the future, it’s time to broaden our understanding of what it means to support maternal and child health. Policies that address violence against women and protect female health workers must become a central pillar of MNCH efforts. This calls for a multi-pronged approach:
    1. Prioritize Funding for Integrated MNCH and GBV Services: Donors and governments should increase funding for programs that integrate maternal health services with GBV prevention and response, particularly in crisis-prone areas.
    2. Strengthen Health Systems in Humanitarian Settings: We must scale up support for safe, trauma-informed healthcare in conflict zones, ensuring that women and children have access to life-saving care without the threat of further violence.
    3. Protect and Support Women Health Workers: Policies that safeguard the well-being of women health workers are essential. Measures like workplace protections, mental health support, and security protocols can help mitigate the impacts of violence and ensure that healthcare workers can provide essential services safely.

The costs of inaction are too high. Each preventable death of a mother or child as a result of violence marks a failure to uphold the rights to health and safety for all. By placing violence against women at the forefront of our MNCH efforts, we can break the cycle of suffering and create the conditions needed for healthy mothers and thriving children.

This 16 Days of Activism, let’s commit to integrated action against violence—because women’s health, newborn survival, and child development depend on it. Together, we can build a world where women and children live free from violence, and where health and dignity go hand in hand.

1 World Health Organization. (2013). Global and regional estimates of violence against women: prevalence and health effects of intimate partner violence and non-partner sexual violence. Geneva: World Health Organization.
2 Shah, I. H., & Hatcher, A. (2013). The impact of intimate partner violence on women’s reproductive health: A review. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 14(2), 128-137. doi:10.1177/1524838012451845
3 Elizabeth P. Lockington et al. Intimate partner violence is a significant risk factor for adverse pregnancy outcomes. AJOG Global Reports. Volume 3, Issue 4, November 2023, 100283
4 Ellsberg, M., & Heise, L. (2005). Researching violence against women: A practical guide for researchers and activists. Geneva: World Health Organization.
5 World Health Organization. (2013). Global and regional estimates of violence against women: prevalence and health effects of intimate partner violence and non-partner sexual violence. Consequences. https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/77431/WHO_RHR_12.43_eng.pdf
6 UNODC. (2021). Sexual violence in conflict: Current trends and implications. Vienna: United Nations. Retrieved from UNODC
7 UNFPA. (2019). Maternal mortality in humanitarian settings. New York: UNFPA. Retrieved from UNFPA
8 UNFPA. (2020). Maternal mortality in emergencies: The hidden crisis. Retrieved from UNFPA
9 Médecins Sans Frontières. (2018). Health workers in conflict zones: Risks and realities. Retrieved from MSF
10 World Health Organization. (2021). Violence against health workers. Geneva: WHO.

Rajat Khosla is Executive Director of the Partnership for Maternal, Newborn & Child Health (PMNCH), the global alliance for women’s, children’s and adolescents’ health and well-being, hosted by the World Health Organization, based in Geneva.

Email: khoslar@who.int

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

One in Three Women Experiences Gender-based Violence

Posted on by admin

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

Opinion

A woman with her baby attends a UN-run awareness-raising session on gender-based violence at the One Stop Centre in Sominé Dolo Hospital in Mopti, Mali. Credit: UNFPA Mali/Amadou Maiga

UNITED NATIONS, Nov 20 2024 (IPS) – Every year, the 16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence (GBV) campaign led by UN Women serves as a powerful reminder of the widespread violence women and girls face worldwide.

Starting from November 25, on the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, and concluding on December 10, on Human Rights Day, this campaign calls on governments, activists, and individuals to unite and push for lasting change.

In support of this civil society initiative the UN Secretary-General back in 2008 launched the campaign UNITE by 2030, which runs parallel to the 16 Days of Activism.

Tweet URL

Every year, the UNITE Campaign focuses on a specific theme and this year’s focus is UNITE! Invest to prevent violence against women and girls, aiming for long-term solutions that address the root causes of the problem.

Why it matters

The statistics are staggering: nearly one in three women and girls worldwide will experience physical or sexual violence during their lifetime.

For at least 51,100 women in 2023, this violence escalated to femicide (homicide targeted at women) with over half committed by intimate partners or family members.

The agency championing women’s empowerment, UN Women, points out that femicides are the ultimate evidence that the systems and structures meant to protect women and girls are failing.

Women are not safe outside their homes either.

Public figures, including politicians, human rights defenders, and journalists, are often targeted by violence both online and offline, with some leading to fatal outcomes and intentional killings.

One alarming aspect of this issue is the prevalence of violence in conflict zones. In 2023, the United Nations reported a staggering 50 per cent increase in gender violence from the previous year.

From survivors to advocates

Women like Ukrainian activist Lyudmila Huseynova exemplify the harrowing reality of conflict-related sexual violence.

After enduring over three years of imprisonment and torture in a Russian prison, where she faced brutal physical abuse, “In that place, you become a person without rights,” she recalled of her torment in Izolyatsia prison, Ms. Huseynova’s resilience turned into activism.

Since her release in 2022, she has become an unwavering advocate for survivors, working with SEMA Ukraine to amplify the voices of those suffering from conflict-related sexual violence and to demand global attention to the atrocities faced by women and children in Ukraine.

Through her tireless efforts, Ms. Huseynova not only exposes the cruelty women endure but also leads efforts to secure justice and recovery for victims. “We will use every means to make their pain visible,” she emphasised.

What can we do?

While we may not all be activists, we all have a role in ending the abuse, says UN Women.

On an individual level, from supporting local organisations to advocating for stronger laws and supporting the women in our lives, everybody can make a difference.

Argentinian activist Iren Cari and founder of Women’s Forum for Equal Opportunities stressed the need to support women in political life and centre their voice: “We need funds to promote women’s participation – not only in public policy making, but also to participate in elections.”

UN Women emphasised that governments must enact laws to ensure accountability for perpetrators of gender-based violence, particularly through National Action Plans.

In parallel, funding women’s rights organizations is essential to support survivors and provide them with the necessary resources for recovery.

The 16 Days of Activism remind us that every action, no matter how small, counts in the fight to end gender-based violence, the agency stresses.

Source: UN News

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

The July Revolution in Bangladesh Is Rooted in Meta-Modernist Philosophy

Posted on by admin

Active Citizens, Asia-Pacific, Crime & Justice, Education, Featured, Headlines, Human Rights, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

BOSTON / PHILADELPHIA, Oct 28 2024 (IPS) – The students and the common people of Bangladesh dared to do something in 36 days of July-August that was considered simply impossible by most people just days before August 5, 2024. They said ‘enough is enough’ to an old order that outraged their humanity, robbed their dignity and the rulers imagined that their citadel of power was simply impenetrable. The revolutionists refused to bow down to the murderous regime that knew no bounds to its cruelty and plundering. They were ready to sacrifice their lives for the freedom of the besieged nation.

Mawdudur Rahman

This revolution is unique in so many ways. It is a revolution in the digital age that is rooted in meta-modernist philosophy. The old political leadership with its moribund appeal and bankrupt philosophy proved irrelevant in this agenda. As Professor Yunus, the Chief Advisor to the Interim Government, has rightly said, ‘Now is the era of a new generation’.

Meta-modernism is the cultural philosophy of the digital age, coined by Mas’ud Zavarzadeh in 1975. meta-modernism is the Age of the Internet or more balanced worldview. As one analyst puts it, we went from modernism — “Make it new!” Let’s shape History! – to postmodernism — everything sucks! Nothing really matters! — to meta-modernism – maybe things are not this black-and-white, maybe there’s a middle ground.

Meta-modernist thinkers perceive the present world around them as a threat to their very existence. They work with pragmatic idealism and have no grand narrative thinking or any orthodox certainties. In other words, they try to strike a balance between all of this. They recognize that they have to face the problems of the society.

Habib Siddiqui

Arguably, all the activities of Bangladeshi revolutionists including their wall posters, followed a framework of Meta-Modernism. It is understood that the new Bangladesh is defined in a new ideology. Student revolutionaries have said that our ideology is reflected through the language we use. The basis of the new ideology is language. It is a revolution of change from the cultural context of fascist imperialist language to the native (spoken) language of the people. In other words, new ideals will be reflected through the language of the people.

It would be wrong to think that this people’s revolution was all about a change of government. Its victory is unlike 1947 and 1971. In both those cases, there was a change of government without any structural change. As a result, the incoming government followed imperialist practices of exploitation left behind by the British. Subsequent governments turned the country into a failed democracy, in order to control, exploit and subjugate its citizens. The police were used as an enabling force to subjugate the citizens, while the legislature and judiciary worked as the rubber stamps to sustain the total control of the government. This evil social system has corrupted the mindset and behavior of our people. An immoral society was formed with no fear of accountability, whose driving force was unfathomed greed and mantra — the ‘rule and exploitation by repression’. Government employees saw themselves as bosses and not as public servants. They thrived upon corruption at all levels.

There are now two competing ideologies in front of Bangladesh – one of decaying fascism that wants to resurface under old leadership and the other is the young leadership of equality and morality. As the revolution demonstrated, the ‘New Bangladesh’ does not approve fascist-supporting corrupt institutions. It desires a corruption-free new society. It is for paradigm shift – a transformational change.

The Chief Advisor and Student Coordinators have clearly highlighted the ideals of New Bangladesh through their speeches and interviews. Dr. Yunus said, ‘We are all one nation’. This is a clarion call to establish a holistic change in society. Such a radical change in society requires a change in values. A change in values lies in the change in public ideology.

The new Bangladesh is not the old Bangladesh with a new cover. It demands a change in the fundamental values of human behavior, actions, and beliefs. These include structural changes, personal changes, expectations.

To understand the ideology of this change, one has to listen carefully to the speech of Mahfuz Alam, the ‘thinker’ of the movement. Five points can be deduced from his recent talks: (1) unity, (2) ‘language is their inspiration’, (3) group leadership, (4) they are children of time, and that (5) they are not a slave to traditional thinking. His views reflect today’s meta-modernism.

For any transformational change to succeed, the change agents must own it, direct it, and ultimately excel in it. We think that this revolution of holistic change can benefit from the revolutionary approaches adopted in China and Cuba that were also led by youths. They owned the revolution and did not allow it to be hijacked by the reactionaries. We see some of these characteristics in the minds and mission of the Bangladeshi revolutionaries.

The bottom line is, bringing any changes in old culture habits was never an easy task. This revolution has presented an opportunity to change the destiny of Bangladesh as never before.

The meta-modernist youths of Bangladesh have come to lead and move forward; they will not go back to the old ways. Their message is clear: if you do not join us, the country will not wait for you. If older generations do not adopt the new view of change, we fear further instability and chaos to come, whose outcome cannot be pleasant.

Dr. Mawdudur Rahman, Professor Emeritus, Suffolk University, Boston, USA. He can be contacted at: mrahman@suffolk.edu.

Dr. Habib Siddiqui is a peace and human rights activists. His latest book – ‘Bangladesh: a polarized and divided nation?’ is available in the Amazon.com. Both are members of the steering committee of Esho Desh Gori – Let’s Build Bangladesh.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

‘We Continue Working to Make Sure Afghan Girls and Women Are Heard and Not Forgotten’

Posted on by admin

Asia-Pacific, Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Education, Featured, Gender, Headlines, Health, Human Rights, Labour, Press Freedom, TerraViva United Nations

Oct 15 2024 (IPS) –  
CIVICUS discusses Afghanistan’s system of gender apartheid with Shaharzad Akbar, Executive Director of Rawadari, a human rights organisation founded by Afghans in exile.

Since regaining power in August 2021, the Taliban have banned women from all education beyond primary school and most jobs. They don’t allow women to travel without a male guardian or be seen in public, with severe penalties for violations. A new law introduced in August 2024 further silenced women by literally banning them from being heard in public. This received widespread international condemnation. Afghan civil society, mostly in exile, continues to document human rights abuses, advocate with international allies and campaign for change.

Shaharzad Akbar

How much space is there for civil society to operate in Afghanistan under the Taliban?

Not much. Although there’s still some civic resistance, mainly led by women, the Taliban have dismantled almost all civic structures. They have disbanded student associations and teachers’ unions and severely restricted the space for civil society to operate.

Long before they took power, the Taliban targeted civil society activists, journalists and religious and tribal leaders who challenged their rules. But when they regained power in August 2021, they used state institutions to further restrict civic space. It was women who resisted: just one day after the Taliban seized Kabul, they took to the streets to demand their rights. Independent media cautiously tried to cover these protests, but journalists were beaten and tortured. By January 2022, the Taliban were arresting women protesters. Cases of arbitrary detention, torture and intimidation and enforced disappearances have only increased since then.

The Taliban repealed laws protecting journalists and civil society, increased censorship and used intimidation to silence independent media. Anyone who criticises their government, even if it’s a social media post questioning electricity cuts, is likely to receive a phone call from the Taliban’s intelligence agency ordering them to delete it and not to raise the issue again.

It’s now impossible to work openly on human rights or freedom of expression in Afghanistan. The Taliban shut down the organisation I headed, the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC). Other organisations working on cultural rights, peacebuilding and social issues have either changed their mandates or left.

How have the Taliban responded to women’s resistance?

When they returned to power, the Taliban were surprised to see women take to the streets against them. Given the Taliban’s violent past, many men didn’t dare protest. But women, who the Taliban underestimated because they saw them as weak, stood together and challenged them publicly.

At first they thought the protests would die down, but when this didn’t happen, they responded with increased violence, imprisoning and torturing women activists and targeting their families. They also launched a smear campaign accusing them of not being ‘authentic’ Afghan women. Since then, they’ve tried to impose the idea that Afghan women belong at home, fully covered and without any public aspirations.

Many repressive decrees followed. First, women were segregated from men in universities, then required to cover up even more and finally banned altogether from universities in December 2022. Restrictions on women’s work also increased over time: women were first restricted to the government health and education sectors and they were later banned from working for civil society organisations and the United Nations (UN). The result was a full-blown system of gender apartheid.

But women refused to be erased and found new ways to resist. Some have continued to protest publicly, even at great risk to their lives and those of their families. A notable example is a protester who was detained with her four-year-old son. Others have opted for more subtle forms of resistance, setting up clandestine schools and seeking education delivered via WhatsApp by Afghan diaspora and international educators. Women’s rights activists, both inside and outside Afghanistan, have formed advocacy networks that are very active in international and regional forums.

When was Rawadari founded and what does it do?

Rawadari was publicly launched in December 2022 by a group of exiled former AIHRC staff. We had been documenting human rights abuses for over a decade and were forced into exile when the Taliban came to power. We set up Rawadari because we felt it was important to continue monitoring and documenting the situation, and to counter the disinformation being spread by the Taliban.

Rawadari’s work focuses on three areas. The first is human rights monitoring. To date, we have published nine reports, available in English and Afghanistan’s two main languages, Dari and Pashto. We want to ensure they are accessible to both local and international audiences.

Our second area is advocacy, particularly on accountability and victim-centred justice. We regularly submit reports to the UN and push for the Taliban to be brought before the International Court of Justice and International Criminal Court. We also advocate for additional resources for the UN Special Rapporteur on Afghanistan and are exploring other mechanisms, such as the establishment of a people’s tribunal for Afghanistan.

The third focus of our work is to promote a culture of human rights. This is difficult because, being outside Afghanistan, we have to do it through social media campaigns and online discussions and events. But we try to keep the conversation going and build alliances within the human rights community and beyond.

How are you campaigning for women’s rights?

In June this year, it was 1,000 days since the Taliban banned girls from going to school. To raise awareness and keep the issue alive in people’s minds, we launched the Iqra campaign (‘read’ in Arabic). We worked with Musawer, an organisation led by the renowned Afghan poet Shafiqa Khpalwak.

As we couldn’t use video footage for security reasons, we asked girls to record a short audio clip about how the ban on education affected them. This wasn’t easy, because many girls don’t have their own phones and identifying them could put them at risk. But we managed to gather voices from across Afghanistan.

The campaign was a success because it centred the voices of Afghan girls from every corner of the country and brought them to the fore, and because it gained support from men and women. Girls spoke about the dreams they’ve lost, the friendships they miss and the depression and negative thoughts they battle every day. Some said they’d witnessed early marriages among their friends. They all appealed to the international community to support their right to education. Some clips reached thousands of people, and prominent Afghan singers, TV personalities and other celebrities amplified the message and called for the reopening of girls’ schools.

We’ve also recently worked with Femena, a regional organisation, to launch a campaign in response to the recent ban on women’s voices in public spaces. Afghan women, at great risk, began singing as a form of protest. To show solidarity, we asked people around the world to share a song, poem or message of support each week. So we continue working to make sure Afghan girls and women are heard and not forgotten.

What challenges do you face in your work?

One of the main obstacles we face is the complete closure of the physical spaces in which we used to work. We can’t hold programmes in schools, universities or mosques in Afghanistan, nor can we speak openly about human rights issues without putting people at serious risk. This severely limits our ability to have face-to-face conversations, which are crucial for mobilising support and building relationships.

Another major challenge is gathering and verifying information. In the past, when there was a violent attack, we would go to hospitals and other local facilities to get details. Now the Taliban have ordered these facilities not to share sensitive information. Families of victims and survivors are also often afraid to speak out, making it difficult for us to document serious violations such as disappearances. Even when we promise them full and strict confidentiality, families are too afraid to come forward.

It is also a challenge to protect our network in Afghanistan. Something as simple as compensating people for their communication or transportation costs could put them in danger. We can’t organise collective online training sessions because participants could reveal their identities to each other, increasing the risks.

On the advocacy front, our biggest challenge is the lack of political will. Afghanistan has largely fallen off the international agenda and many western countries, particularly the USA, are reluctant to get involved. There’s a general perception that Afghanistan is a failed intervention they want to move on from, which leads to a lack of investment in improving the situation, particularly in this election year. Global attention and resources have also shifted to other crises such as the war in Gaza.

This risks normalising the Taliban regime. Neighbouring countries, including China, Iran and the United Arab Emirates, are gradually developing relations with it. We fear that the Taliban regime, which is not yet officially recognised by any country, may eventually gain the international recognition it seeks despite its policy of gender apartheid.

What international support does Afghan civil society need?

Humanitarian aid is key to meeting immediate needs, but it doesn’t address the underlying problems. There is an urgent need to improve the economy, but the international community must find ways to do this without empowering the Taliban, who don’t really care about the wellbeing of Afghan people.

States must be careful to avoid actions that could be seen as accepting the Taliban’s repressive policies and lead to their normalisation. For example, when they engage diplomatically with the Taliban, they must include women and civil society representatives in their delegations. It’s not about stopping engagement with the Taliban; it’s about ensuring every interaction sends a strong message about the importance of human rights, and specifically women’s rights.

People around the world can also help by urging their governments to take a principled approach in their engagement with the Taliban, prioritise women’s rights, hold the Taliban accountable and support education programmes, scholarships and initiatives for Afghan women and girls. They can also support organisations that campaign for their rights.

Even simple acts of solidarity like singing a song and reading a poem in support of Afghan women, if done collectively, can keep the international spotlight on Afghanistan, give hope to women and girls in Afghanistan and therefore make a difference.

Get in touch with Rawadari through its website or Facebook and Instagram pages, follow @rawadari_org and @ShaharzadAkbar on Twitter, and contact Shaharzad on LinkedIn.

  Source

‘The Focus Should Be on Holding Social Media Companies Accountable, Not Punishing Individual Users’

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Democracy, Featured, Freedom of Expression, Global, Headlines, Press Freedom, TerraViva United Nations

Oct 7 2024 (IPS) –  
CIVICUS discusses the recent Twitter/X ban in Brazil with Iná Jost, lawyer and head of research at InternetLab, an independent Brazilian think tank focused on human rights and digital technologies.

Brazil’s Supreme Court recently upheld a ban on Elon Musk’s social media platform X, formerly Twitter, after it repeatedly refused to comply with orders to moderate content. The court ordered tech companies to remove X from app stores and imposed fines for continued access via VPNs in Brazil. This appeared to cause users to switch to alternatives such as Bluesky and Threads. Musk condemned the ban as an attack on free speech, but has since backed down and complied with the court’s orders. Debate continues over the controversy’s implications for democracy and accountability.

Iná Jost

Why did the Brazilian Supreme Court ban X?

The case began on 7 August when a Supreme Court justice, investigating ‘digital malicious activities’, ordered the blocking of seven X profiles for intimidating law enforcement officers and directly threatening the integrity of the court and democracy in Brazil.

X refused to comply with the order, claiming it violated freedom of expression. The judge then imposed a daily fine for non-compliance, which was subsequently raised and ended up amounting to over US$3 million as Musk continued to refuse to comply. At one point, the justice ordered the freezing of X’s financial assets in Brazil, but they weren’t enough to cover the fines.

After more back and forth, tensions escalated when the judge also froze the bank accounts of satellite internet company Starlink, arguing that both companies were part of the same economic group. This caused some controversy, as Starlink operates in a different sphere and its operations aren’t entirely linked to X.

The turning point came when X closed its headquarters in Brazil. Without a legal representative in the country, the court found it difficult to enforce its orders or impose additional penalties. It then gave X 24 hours to appoint a new representative, which it failed to do. As a result, on 30 August, the court ordered the closure of X.

It is important to mention that the court is not super transparent and the whole procedure was carried out under seal. We are unable to grasp the full picture because the process is closed and not all decisions are made public.

What was the legal basis for the decision to close X?

The Court based its decision on Brazil’s 2014 Civil Framework for the Internet. Under this law, platforms can be blocked for failing to comply with Brazilian laws or court orders. Some confusion arose over the notion that the ban was due to X’s lack of a legal representative in Brazil; however, the shutdown resulted from the company’s repeated refusal to comply with court orders.

Civil society raised concerns about some aspects of the decision. Initially, the order included blocking VPN services to prevent access to X, but this part was later reversed due to cybersecurity risks. Blocking VPNs that serve legitimate purposes would have been disproportionate. The order also proposed a US$9,000 fine for users trying to circumvent the ban, which many felt was excessive. We believe the focus should be on holding the company accountable, not punishing individual users.

Is it possible to strike a balance between regulating online platforms and protecting freedoms?

It is. Regulating platforms isn’t necessarily about censorship. In this case, it’s about ensuring a powerful company operates transparently and protects users. Platforms acting solely in their commercial interests can harm the public interest. Regulation can force them to provide clear terms and conditions and fair content moderation policies and respect due process for content removal.

The belief that any form of regulation threatens freedom of expression is misguided. Thoughtful regulation that allows users to express themselves while protecting them from harm such as hate speech or misinformation can balance the scales.

Musk’s stance in this case is deeply problematic. His selective compliance with court orders undermines the rule of law. While platforms like X are crucial to public communication, that doesn’t give them the right to defy the legal system they operate in. Freedom of expression does not absolve platforms of their legal responsibilities, particularly when those laws protect the integrity of democracy.

Musk’s claim that X represents absolute freedom of expression fails to consider the risks of a platform without proper rules. Without moderation, platforms can become havens for extremist groups, hate speech and disinformation. They should be regulated to ensure they remain a space for lawful discourse.

Do you think this case will set a precedent?

I don’t think so. Some people are worried other platforms could be blocked as well, but I don’t think that will happen. This is a unique scenario, and Brazil is a strong democracy. This wasn’t an act of censorship by the judiciary but a necessary measure given the platform owner’s refusal to comply with court orders.

States should develop regulatory mechanisms that allow them to hold platforms accountable and ensure compliance with national laws. This would avoid the need for outright blocking, which ultimately harms the users the most. While the company might incur some financial losses, journalists and citizens are losing access to a vital information and communication tool.

I hope states that are serious about regulating platforms will see this as an example of what shouldn’t happen. We shouldn’t allow things to escalate to this point. And we certainly shouldn’t use this as a leading case for blocking platforms.

Get in touch with InternetLab through its website or its Instagram and Facebook pages, and follow @internetlabbr on Twitte.

  Source