Colombia’s Historic Child Marriage Ban

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Education, Featured, Gender, Gender Violence, Headlines, Health, Human Rights, Indigenous Rights, Latin America & the Caribbean, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations, Women’s Health

Opinion

Credit: Fundación Plan/Instagram

MONTEVIDEO, Uruguay, Jan 8 2025 (IPS) – Colombia has just marked a historic milestone in the global campaign against child marriage, with the Senate passing one of Latin America and the Caribbean’s most comprehensive bans on child marriage and early unions. In a country where one in five girls under 18 and one in 10 under 14 are married or live in marriage-like conditions, the new law raises the minimum age to 18 with no exceptions, eliminating a 137-year-old Civil Code provision that allowed children over 14 to marry with parental consent. This achievement aligns with goal 5 of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which has a target of eliminating harmful practices like child marriage by 2030. The new law now awaits the signature of President Gustavo Petro to come into effect.

The breakthrough

Child marriage disproportionately affects Colombia’s most vulnerable communities, with rates of between 40 and 65 per cent among rural, Indigenous and Afro-Colombian populations. In some communities, girls as young as 10 are married off. These early unions expose girls to unequal power relations, deny them education, limit their bodily and economic autonomy and lead to higher rates of gender-based violence and health issues linked to early pregnancy.

The passage of the #SonNiñasNoEsposas (‘They are girls, not wives’) bill reflected the power of persistent civil society advocacy. After several failed attempts since 2007, the bill, authored by two congresswomen, passed with unanimous support. This success was driven by a coalition of Colombian civil society organisations as part of the Girls Not Brides global network, including the Foundation for Gender and Family Development, Fundación Plan and Profamilia, working alongside international partners such as Equality Now and Plan International, with Girls Not Brides directly supporting legislative advocacy and media campaigns.

Beyond raising the marriage age, the new law establishes the National Comprehensive Programme for Life Projects for Children and Adolescents. This preventive initiative targets the structural causes of early unions – poverty and lack of education – particularly in remote rural areas. The programme includes the participation of Indigenous communities through their own governance structures, recognising the importance of cultural sensitivity in implementation.

The global landscape

Colombia is by no means alone in having a child marriage problem. Around the world, some 12 million girls are married each year, two million before the age of 15. While child marriage can affect boys as well, girls are six times more likely to be married as children than boys.

According to the Child Marriage Monitoring Mechanism, a collaborative initiative to generate evidence to support efforts to end child marriage, one in five young women worldwide are married before their 18th birthday, with rates highest in sub-Saharan Africa.

To tackle this problem, The Elders, a group of senior public figures, launched the global Girls Not Brides partnership in 2011. With over 1,400 member organisations in more than 100 countries, Girls Not Brides works to prevent under-age marriage, recognising it as both a human rights violation and an obstacle to development. It identifies four main drivers of child marriage: poverty, limited educational and economic opportunities, gender inequality and insecurity in conflict or disaster situations. It tackles the problem with awareness-raising campaigns, national and international policy advocacy and community engagement to challenge social norms that perpetuate child marriage.

Since then, efforts have multiplied. In 2016, the United Nations Population Fund and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) launched the Global Programme to End Child Marriage. Now in its third phase, set to run until 2030, the programme operates in 12 high-prevalence countries in Africa, the Middle East and South Asia. Working directly with governments, it has reached millions of adolescent girls, focusing on education, healthcare and economic opportunities.

Regional-level initiatives include the South Asian Initiative to End Violence Against Children, which works in Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, the Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, and the African Union’s Campaign to End Child Marriage in Africa, launched in 2014 in 10 high-prevalence countries and later expanded to 30.

Many more initiatives work at national and local levels. They combine multiple responses, including working with religious and community leaders to change social norms, supporting girls’ education and economic empowerment, engaging with men and boys on gender equality, advocating for stronger laws and their enforcement, providing support services to girls at risk of child marriage, using media and technology to raise awareness and change attitudes and building networks of young advocates and change-makers.

Progress and challenges

These efforts have contributed to a global decline in child marriage rates. According to UNICEF, the proportion of young women married as children has decreased from 25 per cent to 21 per cent over the past decade, meaning that 25 million child marriages have been prevented. However, the global number of child brides is still estimated at 650 million, including girls under 18 who have already married and adult women who married as children.

The average annual rate of reduction has been 0.7 per cent over the past 25 years and 1.9 per cent over the past decade, showing the impact of recent initiatives. But at this rate, the SDG target of eliminating the practice by 2030 won’t be achieved.

Setbacks have been caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, climate change, conflict and economic instability. Wherever insecurity rises, so does child marriage, as parents see early marriage of daughters as a financial and security solution. During Syria’s conflict, for example, the rate of child marriages shot up among refugees in countries such as Jordan and Lebanon.

Looking ahead

Colombia’s new law marks significant progress, but it’s just the beginning, as evidenced by the fact that many of the early marriages that take place in Colombia would have been illegal under the old law.

The real work of implementation begins now. Colombia’s efforts over the next few years will be crucial in demonstrating how legislative change can translate into real protection for vulnerable girls. For Latin America and the Caribbean, it should open up opportunities for strengthened cross-border cooperation and similar legislative reforms.

Colombia’s comprehensive approach could serve as a model for change in a region where many countries still have legal exceptions that allow child marriage under some circumstances, while others have strong laws that aren’t adequately implemented.

While the declining trend in global child marriage rates offers hope, the current pace of change remains far too slow. Colombia’s example shows that significant progress is possible through sustained, multi-stakeholder commitment and comprehensive approaches that change laws but also address underlying social dynamics. The international community must build on this momentum. This means scaling up successful initiatives, increasing funding for civil society organisations and maintaining political pressure.

Inés M. Pousadela is CIVICUS Senior Research Specialist, 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

South Korea’s Democracy Defended

Posted on by admin

Asia-Pacific, Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Democracy, Economy & Trade, Featured, Gender, Gender Identity, Headlines, Human Rights, Press Freedom, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Credit: Daniel Ceng/Anadolu via Getty Images

LONDON, Dec 20 2024 (IPS) – Democracy is alive and well in South Korea. When President Yoon Suk Yeol tried to impose martial law, the public and parliamentarians united to defend it. Now Yoon must face justice for his power grab.

President under pressure

Yoon narrowly won the presidency in an incredibly tight contest in March 2022, beating rival candidate Lee Jae-myung by a 0.73 per cent margin. That marked a political comeback for one of South Korea’s two main political parties, the rebranded centre-right People Power Party, and a defeat for the other, the more progressive Democratic Party.

In a divisive campaign, Yoon capitalised on and helped inflame a backlash among many young men against the country’s emerging feminist movement.

South Korea had a MeToo moment in 2018, as women started to speak out following high-profile sexual harassment revelations. South Korea is one of the worst performing members on gender equality of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development: it ranks third lowest for women’s political representation and last for its gender pay gap.

Some modest steps forward in women’s rights brought a disproportionate backlash. Groups styling themselves as defending men’s rights sprang up, their members claiming they were discriminated against in the job market. Yoon played squarely to this crowd, pledging to abolish the gender equality ministry. Exit polls showed that over half of young male voters backed him.

Human rights conditions then worsened under Yoon’s rule. His administration was responsible for an array of civic space restrictions. These included harassment and criminalisation of journalists, raids on trade union offices and arrests of their leaders, and protest bans. Media freedoms deteriorated, with lawsuits and criminal defamation laws having a chilling effect.

But the balance of power shifted after the 2024 parliamentary election, when the People Power Party suffered a heavy defeat. Although the Democratic Party and its allies fell short of the two-thirds majority required to impeach Yoon, the result left him a lame-duck president. The opposition-dominated parliament blocked key budget proposals and filed 22 impeachment motions against government officials.

Yoon’s popularity plummeted amid ongoing economic woes and allegations of corruption – sadly nothing new for a South Korean leader. The First Lady, Kim Keon Hee, was accused of accepting a Dior bag as a gift and of manipulating stock prices. It seems clear that Yoon, backed into a corner, lashed out and took an incredible gamble – one that South Korean people didn’t accept.

Yoon’s decision

Yoon made his extraordinary announcement on state TV on the evening of 3 December. Shamefully, he claimed the move was necessary to combat ‘pro-North Korean anti-state forces’, smearing those trying to hold him to account as supporters of the totalitarian regime across the border. Yoon ordered the army to arrest key political figures, including the leader of his party, Han Dong Hoon, Democratic Party leader Lee and National Assembly Speaker Woo Won Shik.

The declaration of martial law gives the South Korean president sweeping powers. The military can arrest, detain and punish people without a warrant, the media are placed under strict controls, all political activity is suspended and protests are widely banned.

The problem was that Yoon had clearly exceeded his powers and acted unconstitutionally. Martial law can only be declared when there are extraordinary threats to the nation’s survival, such as invasion or armed rebellion. A series of political disputes that put the president under uncomfortable scrutiny clearly didn’t fit the bill. And the National Assembly was supposed to remain in session, but Yoon tried to shut it down, deploying armed forces to try to stop representatives gathering to vote.

But Yoon hadn’t reckoned with many people’s determination not to return to the dark days of dictatorship before multiparty democracy was established in 1987. People also had recent experience of forcing out an evidently corrupt president. In the Candlelight Revolution of 2016 and 2017, mass weekly protests built pressure on President Park Guen-hye, who was impeached, removed from office and jailed for corruption and abuse of power.

People massed outside the National Assembly in protest. As the army blocked the building’s main gates, politicians climbed over the fences. Protesters and parliamentary staff faced off against heavily armed troops with fire extinguishers, forming a chain around the building so lawmakers could vote. Some 190 made it in, and they unanimously repealed Yoon’s decision.

Time for justice

Now Yoon must face justice. Protesters will continue to urge him to quit, and a criminal investigation into the decision to declare martial law has been launched.

The first attempt to impeach Yoon was thwarted by political manoeuvring. People Power politicians walked out to prevent a vote on 7 December, apparently hoping Yoon would resign instead. But he showed no sign of stepping down, and a second vote on 14 December decisively backed impeachment, with 12 People Power Party members supporting the move. The vote was greeted with scenes of jubilation from the tens of thousands of protesters massed in freezing conditions outside the National Assembly.

Yoon is now suspended, with Prime Minister Han Duck-soo the interim president. The Constitutional Court has six months to hold an impeachment process. Polls show most South Koreans back impeachment, although Yoon still claims his move was necessary.

Democracy defended

South Korea’s representative democracy, like most, has its flaws. People may not always be happy with election results. Presidents may find it hard to work with a parliament that opposes them. But imperfect though it may be, South Koreans have shown they value their democracy and will defend it from the threat of authoritarian rule – and can be expected to keep mobilising if Yoon evades justice.

Thankfully, Yoon’s attacks on civic space hadn’t got to the stage where civil society’s ability to mobilise and people’s capacity to defend democracy had been broken down. Recent events and South Korea’s uncertain future make it all the more important that the civic space restrictions imposed by Yoon’s administration are reversed as quickly as possible. To defend against backsliding and deepen democracy, it’s vital to expand civic space and invest in civil society.

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

  Source

South Africa’s G20 Presidency: A Call for Transformative Leadership in a Fractured World

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Climate Action, Climate Change, Climate Change Justice, Economy & Trade, Environment, Gender, Global, Headlines, Human Rights, Inequality, Sustainability, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

G20 social in Rio de Janeiro, Brasil.

NEW DELHI, India, Dec 9 2024 (IPS) – South Africa’s G20 Presidency begun in December, with only 12% of SDG targets on track and significant backsliding on more than 30%. As we write this today, there is an urgent need for a paradigm shift and practical solutions for a progressive, people-centred, and development-driven agenda in a fractured global landscape that needs collective healing.

This sense of urgency was pinned down at the recent G20 Summit in Brasil, where South Africa assumed the Presidency amidst calls from global civil society at the Civil20 (C20) Summit to address today’s most pressing challenges: climate change, gender inequality, social inequalities, economic injustice and attacks on civic space.

This year, the Brasilian Association of NGOs (Abong), chaired the C20, amplifying the demands of social movements and civil society for global justice, highlighting the importance of gender in public policies, anti-racist economies, climate justice, the fight against hunger and the urgent need for a reform of international governance.

“Civil society is not merely a participant; it is a driving force for justice, equity, and sustainability. Without our voices at the table, solutions risk being incomplete, inequitable, and disconnected from the realities of the most vulnerable,” says Henrique Frota, Executive Director of Abong.

Yet, while the G20 leaders addressed major global crises, from climate change to economic inequities, the voices of those most affected by these challenges—grassroots movements, communities that have been historically marginalised, and civil society actors—still struggle to resonate within the halls of power. In fact, gaps persist in ambition and action, exposing a troubling disconnect between commitments made in international forums and the lived realities of citizens from across the globe.

Civil Society as Equal Partners: Moving Beyond Symbolism

The G20 Rio de Janeiro Declaration, emphasizes inclusivity and acknowledges civil society’s role , but it omits the issue of shrinking civic space in many member countries. The G20 should adopt concrete measures to protect civic freedoms and support CSOs in challenging environments. Futhermore, while the Declaration noted the inclusion of civil society groups in dialogues like the G20 Social Summit, it stopped short of guaranteeing institutionalised access for CSOs.

Jyotsna Mohan Singh, Forus, C20

Aoi Horiuchi, Senior Advocacy Officer at the Japan NGO Center for International Cooperation (JANIC) shared that despite opportunities for C20 to meet, decision-makers and submit recommendations, “access is still limited”. The meeting with President Lula happened just days before the Leaders’ Summit. He emphasizes, “civil society as an official stakeholder group, should have access to all preparatory meetings and have space for speaking up. To truly “leave no one behind”, we need to maintain the momentum and push for more progressive policies on taxing and economic justice.”

Meaningful engagement with civil society cannot be an afterthought. Governments must ensure that civil society has the autonomy, resources, and protected spaces necessary to contribute fully to global governance processes. Expanding civic engagement is crucial, especially at the national level. Data shows that 87% of the global population lives in countries where civic freedoms are restricted.

As we approach the first G20 Summit on the African continent in 2025, “breaking silos, shifting power, and amplifying Global South movements must become central priorities for global governance reform,” says Anselmo Lee, Lead from the Asia Civil Society Partnership for Sustainable Development.

“We must move beyond a purely event-driven approach and establish clear, systematic mechanisms for reviewing decisions and ensuring their effective implementation,” adds Harsh Jaitli, Chief Executive Officer of the Voluntary Action Network India (VANI). Over the years, along with other national platforms, VANI has worked towards strengthening the voice of civil society in this space.

Inequality and Systemic Change: Missing the Mark

The Declaration rightly identified inequality as a root cause of global challenges but failed to propose bold measures to dismantle the structures that sustain the giant inequality pyramid. The creation of the Global Alliance Against Hunger and Poverty is a step forward. Specifically on access to food, the declaration identifies hunger as a pressing global issue, affecting 733 million people in 2023, and emphasizes the G20’s commitment to eradicating hunger. The vague language and lack of binding commitments undermine these efforts. Specific timelines and accountability frameworks are missing.

We need clear action to address inequalities and extreme wealth concentration, fair financing and reforms of multilateral development banks (MDBs) and public development banks (PDBs) to provide financing that directly benefits marginalised communities and an increase in support to local actions, notably investing in community-driven solutions that prioritise equity and sustainability. In the narratives and the actions, there is insufficient detail on the mobilization of resources for grassroots and community-led initiatives, a critical element of Forus’s advocacy for inclusive and sustainable financing.

Policy Coherence: Balancing the Scales and Building a Holistic Approach to Sustainability

While the G20 Declaration highlighted policy coherence as essential for achieving the SDGs, it leans heavily on private sector-driven solutions. Blended finance and private capital mobilization dominated the agenda, sidelining civil society and community-led initiatives and reinforcing the systemic inequities that perpetuate inequality.

A just and sustainable world cannot be achieved through fragmented efforts. Instead, a holistic approach that leverages the collective expertise and experiences of all stakeholders, public, private, and civil society. From a CSO perspective, a critical gap persists in aligning economic growth objectives with environmental, social, and human rights priorities. Without such alignment, conflicting objectives risk perpetuating systemic inequalities and ecological harm, undermining the promise of the SDGs. Moreover, the recent trend of certain governments, such as Argentina’s proposed withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, highlights a dangerous backslide from climate commitments and a disregard for sustainable development goals.

Gender Equality: From Rhetoric to Reality

The G20 Declaration’s recognition of gender equality and commitments to combating gender-based violence are important steps forward. However, the absence of concrete action plans undermines their potential impact. Women and girls continue to face systemic barriers, including unequal access to education, healthcare, and economic opportunities, as well as the pervasive threat of gender-based violence. To achieve meaningful progress, policies must go beyond rhetoric and actively dismantle discriminatory norms while creating leadership opportunities for women across all sectors.

The C20 group, has emphasised the need to address exclusion in all its forms. Expanding spaces for groups that have historically been marginalised and ensuring their full, equal, and meaningful participation in governance processes is not only a matter of justice but also a prerequisite for the type of development that We want. This includes acknowledging the intersecting challenges faced by rural and Indigenous women and those experiencing multiple forms of discrimination.

“Beyond commitments, we need frameworks that address intersectional inequalities and create leadership opportunities for all women, including rural, Indigenous, and LGBTIQ+ communities,” says Alessandra Nilo, C20 Sherpa, Director of Gestos, Brasil.

Reforming Global Governance for a Just Future

The G20 Declaration acknowledges the urgent need to reform global governance systems to address the complex crises of our time—geopolitical tensions, economic inequities, and climate emergencies. Commitments to the UN reform and enhancing transparency in global governance are promising. The emphasis on anti-corruption measures and progressive taxation aligns with civil society’s struggles.

A critical starting point is amplifying the voice of World Majority countries in global decision-making. The inclusion of the African Union as a full G20 member is a welcome development, signaling progress toward inclusivity. However, current power imbalances, where wealthier nations disproportionately influence global policy agendas, must be dismantled to ensure fairness and inclusivity.

As the G20, a premier global forum, assumes increasing responsibility for shaping the global agenda, it is imperative that it takes a strong stance on these issues and “shift powers”.

As the C20 Declaration reminds us, the solutions to today’s challenges lie in inclusive governance that empowers those most affected by global crises. We urge governments and G20 stakeholders to institutionalise civil society participation, prioritise rights-based solutions, and deliver on commitments to equity and sustainability. By weaving together the principles of rights, equity, sustainability, and collaboration, we can begin to build a future where “no one is left behind” not just in theory but also in practice.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

UNCCD COP16 Raises Hopes for Ambitious Global Land Action

Posted on by admin

Combating Desertification and Drought, Conferences, Conservation, Development & Aid, Editors’ Choice, Environment, Featured, Food and Agriculture, Gender, Global, Headlines, Humanitarian Emergencies, Migration & Refugees, Natural Resources, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations, Women & Climate Change, Women & Economy

Combating Desertification and Drought

Announcement of Saudi Arabia’s Riyadh Drought Resilience Partnership Initiative. Photo credit: Anastasia Rodopoulou/IISD/ENB|

Announcement of Saudi Arabia’s Riyadh Drought Resilience Partnership Initiative. Credit: Anastasia Rodopoulou/IISD/ENB|

RIYADH & HYDERABAD, Dec 6 2024 (IPS) – While many delegates at the 16th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD COP16) hope that this could be the convention’s own Paris moment—referring to the historic Paris agreement inked by UNFCCC signatories—however, this hedges heavily on the UN parties’ seriousness to combat drought, desertification and land degradation.

UNCCD COP 16, themed “Our Land and Our Future,” is currently underway in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

One of the biggest expectations from the conference is a landmark decision on achieving a complete halt to land degradation by 2030. The other expectations are mobilizing enough resources to restore all degraded land and achieve total resilience against droughts.

Global Land Degradation at COP

Degradation affects 2 billion hectares of land globally. This is more than the total land area of Russia, the largest country on earth. This affects 3.2 billion people—twice the population of entire Africa. The degraded land area is also continuously expanding as each year an additional 100 million ha get degraded—mostly due to the impacts of climate change such as a drought and desertification. With a business-as-usual approach, by 2050, 6 billion ha will be degraded, warns UNCCD, which is urging the parties of the ongoing COP to take urgent action to halt this.

“Every second, somewhere in the world, we lose an equivalent of four football fields to land degradation. We must act now to restore our lands. They are the foundation of everything. For the first time, through our UNCCD reporting, we have evidence-based estimates of the alarming state of land degradation. COP16 is about our reliance on lands, but also our resilience,” said Ibrahim Thiaw, the Executive Secretary of UNCCD, at the opening ceremony of the COP.

“The scientific evidence is unambiguous: the way we manage our land today will directly determine our future on earth. Land restoration is the first and foremost foundation of our economy, security and humanity. We must restore our land now,” Thiaw said to an audience of party delegates, civil society groups, women’s rights organizations, business and finance experts, members of other UN agencies and youths.

Responding to the UN call, Saudi Arabia, the COP16 host, has promised to deliver strong action.

On Wednesday, December 4, the COP observed “Land Day.” Speaking at the event, Abdulrahman Abdulmohsen AlFadley, UNCCD COP16 President and Saudi Arabia Minister of Environment, Water, and Agriculture, said, “Through our Presidency of COP16, we will work to make this COP a launchpad to strengthen public and private partnerships and create a roadmap to rehabilitate 1.5 billion hectares of land by 2030.”

Finance Gap: Common Challenges of all UN COPs

On Dec 3, the second day of COP, the UNCCD released its financial needs assessment report, detailing the latest funding requirements to address land degradation, drought and desertification. The findings revealed a sizeable funding gap for international land restoration efforts. Based on UNCCD targets, the required annual investments for 2025–2030 are estimated at USD 355 billion. However, the projected investments for the same period amount to only USD 77 billion per year, leaving USD 278 billion that requires mobilization to meet the UNCCD objectives.

In the past, UNCCD’s finance mobilization efforts included the creation of a Land Degradation Neutrality Fund (LDN Fund), a financial mechanism to support the achievement of Land Degradation Neutrality (LDN)—a target under the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG 15.3). But, similar to the climate change COPs and the biodiversity COPs, UNCCD’s LDN fund is underfunded and has only received USD 208 million.

However, on the second day of COP16, the Arab Coordination Group pledged USD 10 billion to combat land degradation, desertification and drought. The donation would go to the Riyadh Global Drought Resilience Partnership, an initiative launched by Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia has also already announced a donation of USD 150 million to operationalize the initiative. The additional backing took place during the Ministerial Dialogue on Finance, part of the high-level segment at COP16 in Riyadh, aimed at unlocking international funding from the private and public sectors.

The Missing Private Sector Investment

The Riyadh Global Drought Resilience Partnership will also focus on unlocking new financial mechanisms, such as credit, equity financing, insurance products, and grants, to enhance drought resilience.

With over USD 12 billion pledged for major land restoration and drought resilience initiatives in just the first two days, COP16 in Riyadh is already bringing more hopes than the biodiversity (UNCBD) and climate change (UNFCCC) COPs.

Dr. Osama Faqeeha, Deputy Minister for Environment, Ministry of Environment, Water and Agriculture, and Advisor to the UNCCD COP16 Presidency, said: “I hope this is just the beginning, and over the coming days and weeks, we see further contributions from international private and public sector partners that further amplify the impact of vital drought resilience and land restoration initiatives.”

However, the convention has still not been able to unlock any significant private funding, which has been identified by many as a huge challenge in the path of achieving total land restoration. According to the COP Presidency, only 6 percent of the private investors and businesses have invested in land-related initiatives and the funding gap in the UNCCD is a ‘worrying blackhole.”

“If the international community is to deliver land restoration at the scale required, then the private sector simply must ramp up investment. As the latest UNCCD findings show, there remains a worrying blackhole in the funds needed to combat land degradation, desertification and drought,” said Faqeeha.

A Gender-Just Financing Solution: Can COP16 Deliver?

Following a series of events this year at the UN General Assembly, the CBD COP16 in Cali, Colombia and COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, the ‘Rio Convention Synergies’ dialogue also took place on Land Day, highlighting developments made during the 2024 Rio Trio events. The event discussed the interconnected issues driving land degradation, biodiversity loss and climate change and how to find common solutions.

Most participants highlighted the disproportionate impact of drought and land degradation on women and their urgent requirement for access to finance.

Women’s Leadership for Sustainable Land Management, Tarja Halonen, UNCCD Land Ambassador and Co-Chair of the UNCCD Gender Caucus, said, “Women and girls in rural communities bear the greatest burden of desertification, land degradation, and drought (DLDD), and their empowerment is crucial for addressing urgent land challenges.”

AlFadley noted that women’s empowerment enhances sustainable land management (SLM) and the preservation of ecosystems, as well as long-term resilience against DLDD.

Recognizing the challenges women face to mobilize resources for their own land restoration initiatives often due to lack of capacity and connections, Neema Lugangira, Member of Parliament, Tanzania, advised the COP16 Gender Caucus to connect with parliamentarians in the global climate finance chapter of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund’s parliamentary network.

“It will be good if the UNCCD can have a land restoration parliamentary group,” she said.

Speaking at a high-level interactive dialogue, Odontuya Saldan, Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Mongolia, which will host COP17 in 2026, proposed establishing a global coalition of future rangelands and pastoralism solutions focused on gender equality and the role of youth, children, and women. She said Mongolia would make gender a priority at COP17, where the key theme will be rangelands and pastoralism.

What decisions COP16 makes to provide women land restorers and drought warriors with greater access to land finance is still up in the air.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Ensuring Violence-Free Homes for Sri Lankan 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

The AKASA safe house is seen in Anuradhapura, Sri Lanka. August 2023. Credit: UN Women/Ravindra Rohana

NEW YORK, Nov 25 2024 (IPS) – A woman’s right to live free from violence is upheld by international agreements like the 1979 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and the 1993 UN Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women.

The International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women, observed on November 25th, 2024, serves as a significant platform to raise awareness about gender-based violence. Globally, one in three women experiences physical or sexual violence, mostly by an intimate partner.

In his message for the 2024 International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, UN Secretary-General António Guterres stated, “The epidemic of violence against women and girls shames humanity. Every day, on average, 140 women and girls are killed by someone in their own family.

Around one in three women still experience physical or sexual violence. Almost 30 years since the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action promised to prevent and eliminate violence against women and girls — it’s beyond time to deliver”.

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a serious public health and human rights concern and affects millions of women worldwide, often remaining underreported and behind closed doors. IPV is particularly acute in South Asia where 35% of ever-partnered women reported experiencing IPV in their lifetime, compared to 20% in Western Europe and 21% in high-income Asia Pacific.

The reasons are complex and include a combination of socio-economic structures, patriarchal attitudes, and prevalent social norms that define gender roles. IPV remains a largely hidden and stigmatized issue, with many women suffering in silence in South Asia.

IPV in Sri Lanka is a significant and pervasive issue. An estimated 40% of women aged 15 years or older reported experiencing physical, sexual, emotional, and/or economic violence or controlling behaviors by a partner in their lifetime. Disturbingly, 21% of the population, or about 4.6 million women, are affected by IPV, given that women constitute 52% of Sri Lanka’s 23.1 million population.

These figures reflect reported cases, but IPV is significantly underreported due to fear of stigma, lack of awareness about available support services, and reluctance to involve authorities in family matters. Many women fear retaliation from their abusers or social ostracism if they speak out.

The Prevention of Domestic Violence Act (PDVA), passed in 2005, provides legal protection for victims of domestic violence in Sri Lanka, allowing them to obtain protection orders against their abusers. The PDVA defines domestic violence as “physical or emotional harm done by a spouse, ex-spouse, or cohabiting partner.” However, its effectiveness has been criticized due to issues with enforcement and limited awareness among both victims and law enforcement.

Despite high levels of educational attainment, 73.5 per cent of Sri Lankan women of working age are out of the labor force, compared to just 26.5% of men. This is mainly due to their engagement in household duties, including care work. Aggravating this situation, women on average earn 27 per cent less than men for one hour of work.

Consequently, many women economically depend on their partners, making it hard to leave abusive relationships. Especially in rural areas, they may lack financial resources or social support to escape violence. This financial vulnerability is a key barrier to addressing IPV in Sri Lanka. Empowering women economically and socially can reduce their dependency on abusive partners.

Among Sri Lankan faith-based communities such as Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus, and Christians, religious leaders are influential authorities on behavior and sources of guidance on proper conduct in relationships, including family and marriage. Therefore, they can play a crucial role in motivating men to cede power and reduce IPV.

This approach, guided more by principles of peace and social justice than by a rights agenda, cannot replace rights-based solutions to end IPV. Therefore, it is necessary to encourage and promote collaboration between faith-based and rights-based organizations to address and end violence against women and girls in Sri Lanka.

Various research shows that the ethnic dimensions of the civil war and the continuing ethnic tensions post-war have worsened the situation for Tamil and Muslim women in Sri Lanka, creating conditions that are likely to keep them entrapped in abusive relationships.

There are also strong associations between IPV and suicidal behavior in Sri Lanka, signaling the need to prioritize violence reduction both on its own and within national suicide prevention strategies.

Empowering women, educating communities, and involving men in the conversation are essential steps toward reducing IPV in Sri Lanka. NGOs like the Women’s Education and Research Centre and international organizations run awareness campaigns to educate people about IPV, its harmful effects, legal rights, and available support services.

These campaigns also engage men and boys in discussions about gender equality and the unacceptability of IPV. The goal is to change societal attitudes that contribute to IPV and make men active partners in promoting non-violent relationships.

In Sri Lanka, several support systems are in place for victims of IPV. Various community organizations and NGOs provide localized support, including shelters and legal aid. The Ministry of Women and Child Affairs operates a toll-free helpline (Dial 1938) that offers counselling and legal support to victims of violence.

Health-sector responses to support women experiencing IPV in Sri Lanka are evolving and currently include two models of integration: GBV desks with facility-level integration, and Mithuru Piyasa, a modified One-Stop Crisis Centre model with some system-wide integration. Additionally, the Ministry of Health has implemented training programs for public health midwives to improve their ability to identify and assist IPV victims.

IPV remains a critical issue in Sri Lanka, influenced by socio-cultural, economic, and legal factors. An effective coordination and information sharing mechanism among the ministries of Health, Women and Child Affairs, and Public Security, at both state and local levels is essential to provide immediate support and empower women experiencing IPV.

Traditional cultural norms in Sri Lanka often view gender roles as rigid, expecting women to be submissive and take on domestic responsibilities. These norms can contribute to the normalization of IPV and limit women’s ability to seek help.

IPV is often seen as a private matter, with victims frequently facing pressure to stay silent. By tackling the economic, political, social, cultural, and other systemic factors that enable IPV, we can create a safer and more equitable environment for all women in Sri Lanka.

Sri Lankan women deserve the fundamental right to a violence-free home life. Achieving this necessitates a unified approach to challenge and transform harmful social norms, enhance the availability and accessibility of support services, and rigorously enforce existing laws.

Only through these coordinated efforts can we create a safer and more equitable society for all women in Sri Lanka.

Shihana Mohamed, a Sri Lankan national, is a founding member and Coordinator of the United Nations Asia Network for Diversity and Inclusion (UN-ANDI) and a US Public Voices Fellow with The OpEd Project and Equality Now on Advancing the Rights of Women and Girls. She is a dedicated human rights activist and a strong advocate for gender equality and the advancement of women.

The author expresses her views in this article in an entirely unofficial, private, and personal capacity. These views do not reflect those of any organization.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

It’s About our Entire Planet: The Pandemic 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

NEW YORK, Nov 25 2024 (IPS) – The 16 Days of Activism to end gender-based violence, started with seeking to eliminate violence against women (VAW). This year’s theme highlights the reality that violence against women and girls is of pandemic proportions. The figures are galling.

References cite how millions of women and girls suffer physical or sexual violence all over the world; 95% of people trafficked for sexual exploitation in Europe are female; every 10 minutes, partners and family members killed a woman intentionally in 2023; one in three women experience violence in their lifetime; 1 in 4 adolescent girls is abused by their partners.

And more. The 16 Days of Activism is an opportunity to revitalize commitments, call for accountability and actions by diverse decision-makers. 2025 will be the 30th anniversary of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action in 2025, described by UN Women as a “visionary blueprint for achieving gender equality and women’s and girls’ rights everywhere”.

Apart from the pandemic scale of the violence against women we are living through – without it being properly declared as a pandemic by governmental authorities – and the horrific data which is on the increase, there are a few pieces of this VAW puzzle that bear stressing.

Lead Integrity’s founding Partner and international activist, Dr Fulata Moyo, who is credited with efforts to institutionalize the World Council of Church’s (WCC) Thursdays in Black campaign, and her successor at leading this and executing a Programme on Just Community of Women and Men, at the WCC – Reverend Nicole Ashwood – stress this centrality of unequal power relations.

Dr Moyo is a strong advocate of mentorship, and yet she reminds us that even this process can be misunderstood as a one-way benefit relationship. Instead, she constantly argues that both mentor and mentoree learn from one another. This insistence on awareness of the mutuality of benefit – and its responsibilities – is a means of righting power imbalances not only among individuals, but in families, societies and nations.

Another Lead integrity founding Partner, Grove Harris – also serving as the UN representative of the Temple of Understanding, and is a strong eco-feminist in her own right – argues cogently that the exploitative violence leveraged on our earth, is a reflection of the exploitative violence perpetuated against women. And vice versa.

In other words, we will need to face a reality that we cannot fight the violence against women and girls, without also struggling to eliminate violence against our planet. These are not separate struggles, but integrated ones.

Lead Integrity’s Senior Advisor and Gender expert, Ms. Gehan AbuZeid expounds further to note that VAW is about endemic structural violence which permeates all domains of life, including ecology, economy, politics, and of course, society.

Inbuilt power relations which prioritize the needs, views, and priorities of one set of humans at the expense of ‘others’ means all our institutions are predisposed to violence against those deemed as more vulnerable by the dominant groups.

Violence against women happens not only because of gendered dynamics per se, but because all of power dynamics around us, are inherently based on exploitative relationships.

This leads to another couple of critical observations – ones which are becoming more taboo to speak of, especially in the kinds of times we live in today. Since the root of VAW are exploitative relationships based on unequal power dynamics, then everyone, every institution and every nation, every initiative, is responsible for ending the structural, the social and the personal forms of these interrelated violent dynamics.

In other words, ending VAW is not, and should not, be left for women alone to end it (even when they may work miracles with male and myriad other allies), nor is it only a matter of legislation – as important as that is. And while we are recognizing the principle and reality of collective responsibility, let us also have the courage to acknowledge that women can be violent towards other women too, and some men are fairly vicious against each other which is statistically related to rising VAW, and as the countless wars around us attest to.

As we consider the collective responsibilities, we need to strengthen our multilateral institutions – not only secular ones, but also those which deliberately seek to partner with different civil society organizations, including those who work to mobilize multi faith and multi stakeholder collaborations.

An example of such a multi-stakeholder and global effort is the first Women, Faith and Climate Change Network, launched at the COP 29 in Baku, Azerbaijan. The Network brings together faith-based and secular, women and male allies, working with governmental, non-governmental and intergovernmental partner institutions, elevating the influence of female faith leaders (including Indigenous ones) to maximize knowledge and impact, to right the power imbalances in each of these diverse institutions, as they work together to eliminate the violence perpetrated against our planet.

We need to ask ourselves this: by continuing to work – and work hard – within our respective silos (secular, religious, feminist, peacemaking, human rights, business, institutional, individual, national, regional, global, etc.), have we not, inadvertently, failed to address the interrelated forms of violence?

And if so, can the recognition of this pandemic of VAW, push us to work better together at a time when we face much polarization and fear – or are we destined to repeat some of the Covid pandemic’s mistakes? If we do, we risk our peaceful co-existence, and – heaven forbid – we may well risk losing the ability to exist on this planet.

Dr Azza Karam is President and CEO of Lead Integrity, and affiliate Professor at Notre Dame University’s Ansari Center for Religion and Global Engagement.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source