Achieving the 10-10-10 HIV Targets by 2025

Posted on by admin

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

Opinion

The Mandaue City government signs the Implementing Rules and Regulations of the city’s Anti-Discrimination Ordinance. This marks a significant milestone for the UNDP-supported Kadangpan Project. Credit: UNDP Philippines

UNITED NATIONS, Jul 26 2024 (IPS) – Around the world countries are taking powerful steps to protect people’s rights, dignity, and health. Dominica and Namibia became the most recent to decriminalize same-sex relations. South Africa made strides towards decriminalizing sex work.

Japan’s Supreme Court ruled that compulsory sterilization for transgender people is unconstitutional, and for the first time the essential role of harm reduction was recognized in a UN resolution on narcotic drugs.

These achievements all contribute to the landmark 10-10-10 HIV targets, adopted by countries in the 2021 Political Declaration on HIV and AIDS, to reduce new infections and tackle criminalization, stigma and discrimination and gender inequality, issues especially critical for people living with HIV and key populations, including sex workers, men who have sex with men, transgender people, people who inject drugs, and the incarcerated.

Yet, for every heartening step toward justice, setbacks and barriers remain. In the last three months alone, Georgia’s parliament moved to curb LGBTIQ+ rights, Iraq criminalized same-sex relationships, countries in Eastern Europe and Central Asia have signed into law sweeping restrictions on civil society and the Malawi courts upheld a ban on same-sex conduct.

Every action we take now will make a difference

With just one year left to meet these targets, we are still off track. What’s more, the global pushback on human rights and gender equality, constraints on civil society, and the acute funding gap for HIV prevention and addressing structural and social barriers, threaten continued progress on AIDS.

This is the time to re-double our efforts. Every single action taken now to meet the 10-10-10 targets will improve the lives and wellbeing of those living with HIV and other key populations well into the future. It will protect the health and development gains of the AIDS response.

If we are to realistically end AIDS by 2030, we must, in lockstep with recent scientific advances, urgently accelerate efforts by shaping enabling policy environments.

Together with partners, UNDP will use its platform at the AIDS 2024 conference, along with a new #Triple10Targets campaign, to call for urgent action to accelerate progress in scaling national key population-led strategies, promoting allyship and inclusive institutions and unlocking sustainable financing.

Community leadership

Key populations and their sexual partners remain at the highest risk for HIV, accounting for 55 percent of all new HIV infections in 2022 and 80 percent of new HIV infections outside of sub-Saharan Africa, a trend which persists. The heightened risk they face is, in part a result of stigma, discrimination and criminalization.

The heart of the HIV response was built by community advocates, past and present, on its inextricable links to human rights. People living with HIV and other key populations are still leading the charge, based on their experiences and knowledge of what their communities need to tackle discriminatory laws and HIV-related criminalization, which deny them services and violate their human rights.

The recent overturning of a colonial-era sodomy law in Namibia, brought to court by Friedel Dausab, a gay Namibian man, showcases such courageous leadership.

But those most affected by and at risk of discrimination, exclusion and violence must not be left to tackle this alone. Their efforts are that much more effective and powerful when met with global solidarity and inclusive institutions, backed by collaboration and investment.

UNDP continues to promote and prioritize the meaningful engagement of people living with HIV and other key populations in decision-making spaces and policy design, through the work done by SCALE, #WeBelong Africa and Being LGBTI in the Caribbean and its HIV and health work more broadly.

The role for allies

Expanding and deepening networks of allies, in particular fostering links between key populations and scientists, health workers, legal professionals, policymakers, faith leaders, media and the private sector, will be vital to building a sustainable HIV response. Finding common ground with broader social movements is a critical element to policy change and reform.

One such UNDP-led initiative brings together members from the judiciary in regional fora in Africa, Eastern Europe and Central Asia and Latin America and the Caribbean to deepen knowledge and understanding of law, rights and HIV, and the impact of punitive laws and policies.

This work has contributed to informing judicial decisions upholding the rights of marginalized communities in Botswana, Kenya, Namibia, Mauritius and Tajikistan and beyond.

Hundreds of parliamentarians worldwide can now support LGBTIQ+ inclusion through the Handbook for Parliamentarians on Advancing the Human Rights and Inclusion of LGBTI People. These demonstrate how allies can use their power and privilege to shape inclusive polices and institutions that support the dignity and human rights of people living with and affected by HIV.

Unlocking innovative financing

Progress will not be possible without addressing the funding gap. Yet investment in HIV is declining, and funding for primary prevention programmes in low- and middle-income countries has dropped, with a sobering 80 percent gap in 2023.

Countries must boost sustainable investments in the HIV response. This includes both for services and for addressing the structural barriers for these services, particularly in low- and middle-income countries.

Through SCALE, UNDP funds 44 key population-led organizations in 21 countries, boosting capacities to share good practice and remove the structural barriers which impede their access to services and violate their human rights. In the Philippines, Cebu United Rainbow LGBT Sector (CURLS) is working towards comprehensive key population protection ordinances, contributing to the recently-signed Implementing Rules and Regulations of Mandaue City’s LGBTIQ+ Anti-Discrimination Ordinance. These will encourage LGBTIQ+ communities to more proactively engage with services.

Strong national leadership and inclusive institutions are also vital to scaling up funding. Last year UNDP worked with 51 countries to expand innovative financing for HIV and health, utilizing strategies such as investment cases, social contracting, inclusive social protection, health taxes and co-financing.

Achieving health for all

As polycrisis threatens the hard-won gains of the HIV response and the clock winds down on the 10-10-10 targets, we must remain steadfast and focused on the task; scaling national key population-led strategies, promoting allyship and inclusive institutions, and unlocking sustainable funding. The stakes couldn’t be higher.

Achieving the 10-10-10 targets will not only be a victory against this preventable disease, but also against the stigma and discrimination faced by those left furthest behind, ultimately benefiting the health of people everywhere.

There is no path to ending AIDS as a public health threat without the triple ten targets.

Mandeep Dhaliwal is Director of the HIV and Health Group, UNDP; Kevin Osborne is Manager, SCALE Initiative, HIV and Health Group, UNDP.

Source: UNDP

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

How African Governments Can Lead the Way on Ending Child Marriage

Posted on by admin

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

Opinion

Credit: Equality Now

NAIROBI, Kenya, Jul 24 2024 (IPS) – Thandi*, a 14-year-old girl from Malawi, is both a child and a mother. After she and her siblings were orphaned, they were left in the care of their grandmother, who struggled to provide for them.

Thandi recalls with sorrow how two years ago, her grandmother ‘sold’ her to a much older man for a bride price of 15,000 Malawian Kwacha (approximately USD $8.65). This meager sum was only enough to buy a week’s worth of food for the family.

Forced to drop out of school to become a wife, Thandi’s dreams of education were abruptly curtailed when she left education in Standard 7 (Grade 6). She explains, “Watching my friends continue with their schooling while I grappled with the challenges of marriage has left lasting scars.”

Over 6,000 kilometers away in Nigeria’s north-western Niger State, at the end of May 2024, the local government orchestrated marriages for 100 young women. Most were orphans who lost parents in the frequent bandit attacks that plague the region. Local officials claim that all the brides were aged over 18, but there are serious concerns that many were minors.

Child marriage remains widespread across Africa

A new report by Equality Now, Gender Inequality in Family Laws in Africa: An Overview of Key Trends in Select Countries, reveals pervasive discrimination in family laws across Africa, where child marriage remains widespread.

The continent is home to 127 million child brides. Although global rates of child marriage have declined from 23% to 19%, current trends suggest that by 2050, nearly half of the world’s child brides will be African.

The causes of child marriage are multifaceted. Challenges such as climate crisis, conflict, and socio-economic instability disproportionately affect women and girls, putting them at greater risk of human rights violations.

Rather than addressing systemic issues like poverty, sexual violence, and poor access to social support and reproductive healthcare, communities often resort to marrying girls off.

Governments are failing to protect girls

As in Thandi’s case, child marriage is commonly treated as a socio-economic band-aid. In her home country of Malawi, the practice has been completely illegal since 2017, when the government took the commendable step of raising the age of marriage to 18 for both boys and girls without exception.

However, child marriage remains widespread amongst a population that has over 70% living below the international poverty line, with 2020 data showing that 38% were married before the age of 18,

The situation is similar in other African countries. Niger is reported to have the world’s highest rate of child marriage among girls, with 76% married before 18. While in Mauritania, World Bank research cited that girls from the poorest households are almost twice as likely to marry compared to those living in the richest households.

Child marriage reinforces gender inequality, with girls viewed primarily as wives and mothers. What is especially concerning is how these harmful societal norms are sometimes state-backed by governments less willing to uphold girls’ rights.

In Mali, a watershed judgment by the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights in 2018 found Mali’s Personal and Family Code, which allows girls to marry at 15 or 16 while setting the same for boys at 18, violated Mali’s international and regional human rights obligations.

The African Court directed Mali to revise its Family Code to set the minimum age of marriage for both girls and boys at 18. Mali’s government has not yet implemented the judgment, rendering girls vulnerable to becoming child brides.

In Tanzania, a landmark judgment in 2016 mandated the government to set the minimum age of marriage for both boys and girls at 18, but Tanzania has yet to amend the Law of Marriage Act. This failure to enforce the judgment is leaving girls unprotected and is compounded by challenges that pregnant girls and adolescent mothers face in accessing education.

Tanzania’s long-term policy of expelling pregnant students from school was ruled by the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (ACERWC) in 2022 to be a violation of girls’ human rights.

While the government has subsequently officially withdrawn this policy, the provisions in the Education Act that authorise exclusion from school of girls who are married, pregnant, or mothers remains unchanged, and there are serious concerns about the impact of Tanzania’s failure to fully implement ACERWC’s decision.

Girls across Africa who become pregnant may face the trauma of being forced to marry as a way to uphold family “honour” and avoid the social stigma associated with pregnancy outside of wedlock.

A cycle of abuse is perpetuated with young wives often denied access to education and economic opportunities, leaving them dependent on their husbands and in-laws. This makes them more susceptible to domestic violence and limits their ability to seek help or escape abuse.

African States have legal obligations to protect girls from early marriage

Child marriage is a gross violation of human rights and is prohibited by Article 16(2) of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), Article 6 of the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa (Maputo Protocol), and Article 21 (2) of the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (the African Children’s Charter).

The Constitutive Act, which established the African Union, recognizes the promotion of gender equality as a fundamental principle of the Union. Guidance on how Member States can end child marriage is provided by instruments such as the Joint General Comment of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) and the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (ACERWC) on Ending Child Marriage.

The Southern African Development Community (SADC) Model Law on Eradicating Child Marriage and Protecting Children Already in Marriage is another great source for states to consider.

Government progress has been slow and inconsistent

Equality Now’s family laws report notes laudable progress, with comprehensive bans on marriage under 18 years introduced in various countries, including Côte d’Ivoire, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Egypt, Kenya, Malawi, Mozambique, and The Gambia.

However, progress overall has been protracted, inconsistent, and impeded by setbacks, insufficient political will, and weak implementation. Challenges are compounded by the plural legal systems in many African countries, where religious and customary legal provisions often contradict regional and international human rights standards.

In countries such as Cameroon, Nigeria, Senegal, South Sudan, Sudan, and Tanzania, discriminatory age limit provisions permit girls to be married younger than boys, while in nations including Angola, Algeria, and Tunisia, exceptions on civil or customary grounds remain.

Education is a remedy for child marriage

Urgent action is needed by 2030 to ensure all girls complete a full cycle of basic education. African leaders must work fast to develop and accelerate the implementation of progressive education policies that align and integrate with laws and policies addressing child marriage.

Strengthening legal frameworks to ensure the minimum age of marriage is set at 18 without exceptions is essential. Prosecution and punishment of perpetrators should be accompanied by behavior change campaigns that shift social norms and raise awareness about the harms of early on girls, their children, and the wider society.

Underpinning this all should be the application of a multi-sectoral approach entailing coordinated efforts across multiple sectors, including the state and civil society. Government policy and funding must prioritize women’s rights and define the responsibilities of different government arms, including health, finance, justice, social welfare, youth, and education agencies.

Providing scholarships and financial incentives, such as conditional cash transfers, can help keep girls in school and diminish the economic incentives for early marriage. Rwanda is a good example, having achieved significant increases in girls’ school enrolment and a corresponding decrease in child marriage.

The country has made education free and compulsory through secondary school, and the state is investing heavily in teacher training and school infrastructure.

Another noteworthy case is Ethiopia’s investment in the Berhane Hewan programme, which combines education with community awareness. Girls who participated were 90% less likely to be married before the age of 15 compared to those not in the programme.

Enhancing the capacity to collect, analyse, and use sex-disaggregated data for policymaking is also crucial for informed decisions. This data can highlight disparities and guide targeted interventions.

Moreover, implementing education programs that include comprehensive sex education is vital. Such programs empower girls with knowledge about reproductive health and their rights, thereby reducing rates of child marriage and early pregnancies.

In Mozambique, the Gender Strategy for the Education Sector aims to create equal rights and opportunities for girls in the education sector. While a strategy like this is geared towards equality in education, if data collection around child marriages is incorporated it can produce results on strategy’s impact on child marriage.

Governments must tackle the root causes of child marriage

To genuinely protect and empower young women, governments must address the underlying causes of girls’ vulnerabilities. This includes tackling drivers such as conflict and climate crisis, improving social protection systems, introducing legal reforms to prohibit child marriage without exception, and ensuring the effective implementation of laws.

Efforts must also be made to challenge and change harmful cultural and religious practices that undermine the rights of women and girls.

Critically, African Union Member States must universally ratify and implement the Maputo Protocol and the African Children’s Charter. To adequately equip girls to thrive in the 21st century, they must also discharge the education and gender equality obligations they have committed to under Agenda 2063 and Africa’s Agenda for Children 2040.

*Thandi is not her real name.

Deborah Nyokabi is Gender Policy Expert, Equality Now.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Iconic Image Makes Trump the Ultimate Hero

Posted on by admin

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

Opinion

Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, addresses the General Assembly’s 75th session in September 2020. Credit: UN Photo/Rick Bajornas

ATLANTA, Georgia, Jul 19 2024 (IPS) – Republican Vice-Presidential nominee JD Vance and other speakers at the GOP Convention gleefully referenced the party’s latest icon: a wounded Donald Trump with blood on his face raising his fist in defiance beneath Old Glory’s stars and stripes.

The MAGA party realizes that they have a powerful symbol that will likely return Trump to the White House, because symbols are supremely powerful for both politics and religion. Associated Press photographer Evan Vucci captured the image, one of the most iconic ever recorded in American history. It fits perfectly into the Republican Campaign theme—“Trump is a hero and only he can save us.” The only other comparable photograph is the unforgettable one showing embattled Marines raising the American flag on Iwo Jima during WW II.

Vucci’s photograph framed a bloody former President, wounded in the assassination attempt, heroically pumping his fist in defiance beneath a red, white, and blue flag against a clear blue sky. It was the perfect photo, taken at a moment of extreme peril for American democracy, and sure to win a Pulitzer Prize.

It could be the key visual message that motivates people to side with Trump as a hero and propel him back to the White House. Photojournalist Doug Mills of the New York Times snapped a remarkable photo of the bullet in mid-air just beyond Trump, but Vucci’s stirring image of the wounded former president conveys a much more impactful message of heroism and patriotism.

Americans clearly prefer a tough, vigorous, even pugnacious and younger male leader (even if the image is false) to an old, decrepit President, especially one stammering to express himself and now sidelined with Coronavirus.

MAGA Republicans insist that people should vote for their hero Trump instead of Biden, pictured as a weak old man, or heaven forbid, by a scrappy female like Hillary Clinton, Kamala Harris, or even Republican Nikki Haley.

Aging leaders have been required to prove their virility from time to time throughout history—in ancient Egypt by running around a course, and in Communist China by swimming, or more likely floating, for ten miles in the Yangtze River, as did Mao Tse-tung in 1966.

His claim of fitness, especially in the photo of him swimming, became an icon across China and revived his political fortunes after the disaster of the Great Cultural Revolution.

Americans consider themselves to be a tough breed. That in turn requires a macho man to be our leader. Even if Trump is not really that, the picture of a defiant Trump surviving an assassin’s bullet and pumping his fist is an incredibly powerful icon at this moment of destiny in the nation’s politics.

There were no photos when Lincoln was shot and the Kennedy assassination photos show blurs in the back of a speeding convertible. The only other iconic photo to stir the emotions of patriotic Americans with equally intense feelings would be that snapshot by photographer Joe Rosenthal Showing US Marines raising the flag on Mount Suribachi.

That picture captured American patriotism so perfectly that it was later sculpted into a colossal statue near the US Capitol in Washington.

Not many people know about semasiography—the science of symbols—but throughout history symbols have had an underlying, supremely powerful influence on religion, politics, and human behavior. This photo of Trump, like the one of the marines, has the capacity to impact people at a visceral level and therefore to change human behavior on a large scale.

There is no question of the overwhelming influence of such a potent symbol at this point in an evenly balanced and fiercely divided, nation.

The way symbols work is like this: they are simple, convey meaning in a generalized sense, and have the capacity to rally multitudes of people, sometimes continuing to evoke allegiance for thousands of years. Many national flags in the modern era include symbols.

The red, white, and blue of the American flag can cause tears to flow, pride to swell the chest, and infuse soldiers with the courage to face cannons on the battlefield.

One of the most omnipresent symbols worldwide is the Christian Cross, which has provided meaning and identity for millions of people over thousands of years. The Nazi Swastika and the Hammer and Sickle rallied Germans and Russians, functioning in a similar way for unbelievably vast numbers of people during WW II.

The swastika, or broken cross, was an ancient Aryan cultural sign, meaning to the Germans “Deutchland Uber Alles,” the racial-political creed of Germany. Hitler was delighted when he found it, knowing he could use it to rally the nation to his banner.

The Soviet hammer and sickle dominated great parts of the globe for much of the Twentieth Century, signifying the rise of the Proletariat. During the Vietnam War, millions of college students protested wearing the peace sign in support of the anti-war movement.

A symbol can carry a different meaning for millions of people, allowing each individual to put his or her own meaning into it, often leading to action. In short, a symbol is a way to capture and intensify personal feelings.

An appropriate and timely icon can be used to lure, move, or drive masses of people toward a desired goal, even if its message is vague and diffuse.

Several modern psychiatrists have focused on symbolism, beginning of course with Freud. The study of semasiography became a major preoccupation of his most prominent successor, Jung. Both knew the power of symbols.

Soon the icon of a defiant Trump—the ultimate American tough guy—will appear on t-shirts and coffee mugs, helping to build a different national culture than the one bequeathed to Americans by Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Kennedy, and others of the Greatest Generation.

This new political culture has already shown its true colors—dominance, retribution, reaction, discrimination, with threats of violence and coercion as the new mechanism of control. Sadly, this is the way history works. Change is coming—prepare for it.

James E. Jennings is President of Conscience International and Executive Director of US Academics for Peace.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Biden Administration Faces Rebellion Within its Own Ranks over Gaza War

Posted on by admin

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

Opinion

Schools-turned-shelters run by the UN agency for Palestine refugees, UNRWA, have suffered serious damage in strikes in the last week. July 2024. Credit: United Nations

UNITED NATIONS, Jul 19 2024 (IPS) – The Biden administration, which has come under heavy fire for its unyielding pro-Israeli stand on the nine-month-old war in Gaza, is facing a rebellion within its own bureaucratic ranks—12 and counting.

The 12 government officials, who recently resigned, have accused the US of providing diplomatic cover for the continuous flow of arms to Israel ensuring “our undeniable complicity in the killings and forced starvation of a besieged Palestinian population in Gaza.”

This is not only morally reprehensible and in clear violation of international humanitarian law and US laws, but it has also put a target on America’s back,” they continue, arguing that it has put the lives of service members and diplomats at risk.

Dr. Alon Ben-Meir, a retired professor of international relations, most recently at the Center for Global Affairs at New York University (NYU), and who taught courses on international negotiation and Middle Eastern studies, told IPS: “I share the overall view of the 12 US government officials who have resigned in protest against the Biden administration’s policy in connection with the Israel-Hamas war”.

They wrote in their joint statement, titled Service in Dissent, that “America’s diplomatic cover for, and continuous flow of arms to Israel has ensured our undeniable complicity in the killings and forced starvation of a besieged Palestinian population in Gaza. This is not only morally reprehensible and in clear violation of international humanitarian law and US laws, but it has also put a target on America’s back.”

https://jointstatement.tiiny.site/

“I have supported Israel’s right to defend itself as well as the Biden administration’s support of Israel’s war efforts, standing by the US’s iron-clad commitment to Israel’s security by providing it with all necessary military aid and political cover.

“I have stated time and again that Hamas’s unprecedented October 7, 2023 attack and Israel’s unparalleled retaliation have reinforced my own view, which I share with many others, that there will be no resolution to the 76-year-old Israeli-Palestinian conflict short of a two-state solution.

I still hold to the position that it will be impossible to return to the status quo that prevailed before October 7, as a new paradigm was created that offered the inimitable opportunity to recommence the peace negotiations that could lead to a two-state solution,” said Dr Ben-Meir.

Meanwhile there have also been negative reactions in European capitals. Last February, the New York Times ran a story headlined “US and European officials release a Letter Protesting Israeli Policies.”

According to the Times report, more than 500 officials in the US, Britain and the European Union (EU) released a “public letter of dissent” against their (respective) government’s support of Israel in its war in Gaza.”

In an oped piece published on the IPS wire July 18, Mouin Rabbani, Co-Editor of Jadaliyya and Non-Resident Fellow with the Center for Conflict and Humanitarian Studies (CHS), says the Letter of Dissent makes indisputably clear that US policy towards the present crisis has been an absolute failure at virtually every level.

https://www.ipsnews.net/2024/07/us-policy-towards-gaza-crisis-absolute-failure-virtually-every-level/

Not only has it failed to achieve any of its objectives and further consolidate Western hegemony in the Middle East, but it has made the US government directly and actively complicit in the genocide currently before the International Court of Justice in The Hague, he said.

As the signatories note, the US is “wilfully” violating not only international laws that are binding upon Washington, but is similarly and knowingly violating US domestic law in its fanatic determination to see Israel’s mass atrocities through to the bitter end, said Rabbani, who is also a Non-Resident Fellow at Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN).

“Tellingly, and quite accurately, they also point out that the Biden administration’s determination to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and his ultra-rightist, annexationist government has led to the suppression of basic constitutional freedoms within the United States,” he declared.

Meanwhile, in an address to the UN Security Council on July 17, Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned that recent developments are driving a stake through the heart of any prospect for a two-State solution.

“The geography of the occupied West Bank is steadily being altered through Israeli administrative and legal steps. The seizure of large land parcels in strategic areas and changes to planning, land management and governance are expected to significantly accelerate settlement expansion”.

These changes, he pointed out, include the issuance of two military orders at the end of May. These orders transferred powers to, and appointed, a civilian deputy in Israel’s Civil Administration, which is alarming.

This move is another significant advance in the ongoing transfer of authority over many aspects of daily life in the occupied West Bank, and a further step towards extending Israeli sovereignty over this occupied territory.

If left unaddressed, these measures risk causing irreparable damage, he said.

“We must change course. All settlement activity must cease immediately. Israeli settlements are a flagrant violation of international law and a key obstacle to peace. The violence must end, and the perpetrators of the violence must be swiftly brought to justice.

Israel must ensure the safety and security of the Palestinian population, Guterres declared.

Elaborating further Dr Ben-Meir said: “Personally, I was in favor of crippling Hamas militarily. Still, I have also repeatedly stated that while Israel may be able to crush Hamas militarily, it will be unable to destroy it as a political movement that holds a specific ideology that calls for Israel’s destruction.

“However, I have never subscribed to the notion that Hamas will ever be in a position to extinguish Israel for many reasons, including the fact that Hamas leaders know only too well that Israel is a formidable military power whose existence is irrevocable. The war has made it clear that challenging Israel’s right to exist is tantamount to suicide”.

President Biden was the first global leader to affirm that, given the new developing circumstances, a two-state solution is a prerequisite to end this endemic conflict.

As the war continued to grind on and as the Palestinians’ death toll and destruction were mounting, and Prime Minister Netanyahu categorically refused to even mention any solution along the lines of an independent state, the whole idea of a two-state solution was dropped from Biden’s lexicon. But the flow of weapons to Israel, if anything, was increasing without any preconditions.

Moreover, the US vetoed two UNSC resolutions that called for a ceasefire while food, water, fuel, and medical supplies were dwindling, and the displacement of Palestinians by the hundreds of thousands continued unabated.

Meanwhile, Israel’s relentless bombing using American-made bombs, which were killing thousands in densely populated areas, made the US complicit in the horrific carnage. By now, more than 37,000 Palestinians have been killed, and more than half of Gaza lies in ruin, Dr Ben-Meir said.

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

Rights Groups Demand Governments Protect Exiled Journalists, Dissidents

Posted on by admin

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

Freedom of Expression

Irene Khan, Special Rapporteur for freedom of expression and opinion, briefs reporters at UN Headquarters. Credit: Manuel Elías/UN

Irene Khan, Special Rapporteur for freedom of expression and opinion, briefs reporters at UN Headquarters. Credit: Manuel Elías/UN

BRATISLAVA, Jul 19 2024 (IPS) – Rights groups have called for governments to do more to combat transnational repression as a series of recent reports show growing numbers of exiled journalists, political dissidents and rights defenders are being targeted by autocratic regimes in an attempt to silence them.

They say governments must do more to deal with the repression, which takes the form of online harassment, surveillance, enforced disappearances, physical attacks and sometimes even killings, to protect the safety of these people.

“We have seen an increase in transnational repression, tied into the rise in authoritarianism around the world in general. Generally, there is a growing awareness of this complex problem among host countries and a willingness to do something about it.

“But more work needs to be done in some areas and governments need to support exiled journalists and understand the vital importance of the work they do,” Fiona O’Brien, UK Bureau Director at Reporters Without Borders (RSF), told IPS.

The scale of the problem has been laid bare in a number of reports in recent months.

In February, rights group Freedom House released a report documenting scores of attacks, including assassinations, abductions and assaults, carried out by governments against people outside their borders in 2023.

Naming Russia, Cambodia, Myanmar, Turkmenistan and China as the biggest perpetrators, it also reported on the first known cases of transitional repression sanctioned by a number of governments, including the regimes of Cuba, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, El Salvador, Myanmar, Sierra Leone and Yemen.

The group said that 44 countries—more than a fifth of the world’s national governments—have attempted to silence dissidents, activists, political opponents and members of ethnic or religious minorities beyond their own borders in the last ten years, with 1,034 recorded direct, physical incidents of transnational repression.

Meanwhile, at the end of June, while presenting a report on transnational repression, the United Nations special rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression, Irene Khan, raised concerns not just about increasing incidents of transnational repression, but host countries’ responses to it.

“Too often, states are either unwilling for political reasons or unable for lack of capacity or resources to protect and support journalists in exile. Journalists should not be treated as political pawns but as human beings in distress who, at great cost to themselves, are contributing to the realization of our human right to information,” Khan said.

Following the report, scores of governments issued a joint statement condemning the repression and committing to coordinated action to help people being targeted and to hold accountable those behind any attacks. But it did not spell out any specific measures that should be implemented to do this.

Rights groups say that concrete steps must be taken by host governments to address the problem both in their own countries, and to confront those regimes perpetrating such acts.

Phil Lynch, Executive Director at the non-profit organisation International Service for Human Rights, said such action should involve host states not only providing comprehensive protection and support to those at risk of acts of transnational repression, but also measures, to undermine the capabilities of regimes to target people abroad.

He said host states must ensure they do not support or acquiesce in acts of transnational repression, such as through extradition or refoulement to states engaged in the persecution of human rights defenders; do not provide or export the tools or technologies of transnational repression, such as spyware and arms, to repressive states; must build awareness and law enforcement capabilities to respond to acts of transnational repression; and publicly denounce, investigate and pursue accountability for acts of transnational repression, including through sanctions and diplomatic repercussions.

“They should also prioritise human rights in foreign policy and relations both at bilateral and multilateral levels, adopting a principled and consistent approach to human rights in all situations, without selectivity and without discrimination,” he told IPS.

The lack of any serious consequences for regimes using transnational repression is helping perpetuate its widescale use, experts say.

“Governments don’t seem to be shying away from using transnational repression. This is likely because there has been very little accountability even in the most well-publicized cases, like the assassination of [Saudi dissident writer] Jamal Khashoggi. Since governments aren’t paying a price for targeting dissidents abroad, there’s little reason for them not to attempt it,” Yana Gorokhovskaia, Research Director, Strategy and Design, at Freedom House, told IPS.

But it is not just host country governments that could do more, experts say.

“Most of the harassment and attacks are online. Big tech have been totally absent from [efforts to fight transnational repression]. Governments have to hold big tech to account on this,” said O’Brien.

“Increasingly, acts of transnational repression occur online or are technology-facilitated. Technology providers have a duty to conduct due diligence to ensure their technologies and tools are not used, directly or indirectly, to restrict or violate human rights, including through acts of transnational repression. Governments should also legislate to mandate that human rights due diligence is undertaken by companies,” added Lynch.

It appears that some countries are becoming increasingly aware of the issue and willing to improve how they tackle it.

O’Brien said this following an RSF report on harassment of Iranian journalists in the UK released earlier this year. British authorities have “shown a lot of interest in how to tackle this problem better,”  while Freedom House has highlighted how President Joe Biden’s administration has made addressing the issue a priority across law enforcement and security agencies.

Gorokhovskaia also pointed out that over the last four years various countries have adopted policies to mitigate the threat posed by transnational repression, including improved training for police and security agencies and more outreach to communities that can be targeted.

“Countries have also become more aware of how international organizations, like Interpol, can be misused for transnational repression and taken steps to address this (by examining Interpol notices from certain perpetrator countries),” she said.

But research from other groups shows a much less reassuring picture.

A report from Human Rights Watch (HRW) said some host country governments were not only failing to ensure adequate protective measures for those at risk but were even actively facilitating transnational repression.

UN special rapporteur Khan also warned of host states becoming enablers “of transnational repression, for instance, by colluding in abductions instigated by the home state.”

Some alleged cases of such facilitation involve ostensibly stable, democratic, western states.

Abdulrahman Al-Khalidi, a political activist and a known dissident, arrived in Bulgaria in October 2021.

A campaigner for human rights and advocate for democratic reforms, he had fled his home country in the wake of mass arrests following the Arab Spring.

But since crossing into Bulgaria and claiming asylum, he has faced a complicated and, he says, at times incomprehensible legal battle over authorities’ continued refusal to grant him asylum and release him from detention at the migration centre despite court rulings in his favour.

He is facing deportation to Saudi Arabia, where, he told IPS, he will almost certainly be killed.

Al-Khalidi believes the Saudi secret service is behind the Bulgarian authorities’ blocking of his asylum. He says that during questioning by agency officials, he was told they were working with Saudi authorities on his case and that Saudi officials wanted him returned to Saudi Arabia. The Bulgarian state security agency has repeatedly said Al-Khalidi is a threat to national security, thereby blocking his asylum and release from detention.

Speaking to IPS in early July as he began a hunger strike while at a migrant detention centre near the Bulgarian capital, Sofia, where he has been held for the last three years, Al-Khalidi had a warning for governments hosting exiled dissidents and journalists.

“We live in a time full of international turmoil in which younger generations believe in anarchism more than they believe in democratic principles. This is very dangerous. The blame for this is fully borne by politicians who benefit from this and whose actions contradict the principles of the state, subsequently raising generations who lose their faith in both,” he said.

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

BRAZIL: ‘The Law Should Protect Women and Girls, Not Criminalise Them’

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Featured, Gender, Gender Violence, Headlines, Health, Human Rights, Inequality, Latin America & the Caribbean, TerraViva United Nations

Jul 18 2024 (IPS) –  
CIVICUS discusses abortion rights in Brazil with Guacira Oliveira, director of the Feminist Centre for Studies and Advice (CFEMEA). CFEMEA is an anti-racist feminist organisation that defends women’s rights, collective care and self-care and monitors developments in Brazil’s National Congress.

In June, thousands of women took to the streets of São Paulo and other cities to protest against a bill that would classify abortion after 22 weeks as homicide, punishable by six to 20 years in prison. Protests began when the lower house of Congress fast-tracked the bill, limiting debate. Abortion is currently legal in Brazil only in cases of rape, foetal malformation or danger to the life of a pregnant person. The proposed bill, promoted by evangelical representatives, would criminalise people who have abortions more severely than rapists. Public reaction has slowed down the bill’s progress and its future is now uncertain.

How would this new anti-abortion law, if passed, affect women?

Currently, abortion is legal in Brazil only in cases of rape, danger to a pregnant person’s life and severe foetal malformation. However, current legislation doesn’t set a maximum gestational age for access to legal abortion. The proposed bill would equate abortion after 22 weeks of pregnancy with homicide, punishing the person seeking the abortion and the health professionals who perform it.

This would particularly affect girls, as over 60 per cent of rape victims are children under the age of 13. In more than 64 per cent of these cases, the rapist is someone close to the girl’s family, making it difficult to identify the rape and the resulting pregnancy.

Another perverse aspect of the problem is racial inequality. Forty per cent of rape victims are Black children and adolescents, and of those under 13, more than 56 per cent are Black girls. Of 20,000 girls under the age of 14 who give birth each year, 74 per cent are Black. In addition, Black women are 46 per cent more likely to have an abortion than white women. The passage of this bill would make Black women and girls even more vulnerable than they already are. The law should protect these women and girls, not criminalise them.

How has civil society mobilised against the bill?

CFEMEA has been monitoring threats to legal abortion for decades and is part of the National Front Against the Criminalisation of Women and for the Legalisation of Abortion. Threats increased with the rise of the far right to the presidency in 2018, and feminist movements mobilised over cases of girls who were victims of sexual violence and faced institutional barriers to accessing legal abortion.

In 2023, in response to regressive legislation, they launched the ‘A child is not a mother‘ platform, recently reactivated as the new anti-abortion bill was submitted as a matter of urgency. More than 345,000 people signed up to the campaign and sent messages to parliamentarians. They also applied pressure on social media through posts and hashtags such as #criançanémãe (#ChildNotMother), #PLdagravidezinfantil (#CongressForChildPregnancy) and #PLdoestupro (#CongressForRape).

We also campaigned through face-to-face actions and other collectively defined strategies, led mainly by state-level alliances against the criminalisation of women and for the legalisation of abortion. In May, we laid a symbolic wreath in front of the Federal Council of Medicine, which in April had published a resolution banning foetal asystole, a procedure recommended by the World Health Organization for legal abortions after 22 weeks. By doing so we symbolised our grief for all the women and girls whose lives are cut short due to lack of access to a legal abortion. We reenacted this outside the official residence of the President of the Chamber of Deputies, just before the fast-track request for the anti-abortion bill was approved, on the evening of 12 June.

The following day, the first public protests took place in several Brazilian state capitals. These continued over subsequent days, culminating in a nationwide action on 27 June. The issue is still on the agenda in July and demonstrations are still going strong.

Why is Brazil moving against the regional trend towards legalisation?

Brazil has seen advances by the religious fundamentalist far right since 2016, when President Dilma Rousseff was removed from office through a legal-parliamentary manoeuvre that amounted to a political coup. The violent ethnocentric, LGBTQI+-phobic, neopatriarchal and racist reaction intensified in 2018 with the victory of Jair Bolsonaro in an election marred by disinformation.

Conservatives view the rights to diverse and plural ways of life as a threat to their existence. In this sense, their regressive proposals are a direct response to women’s struggles against patriarchy and all forms of women’s oppression.

Even after its defeat in the 2022 presidential election, the far right has become stronger in the National Congress, where extremists have obtained majorities in both the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate. This has led to the revival of a bill known as the ‘Statute of the Unborn Child’, aimed at granting ‘personhood’ to the foetus in order to criminalise abortion.

Many factors explain the conservative reaction in Brazil and around the world. For fascists in power and in society, violence is justified against groups considered to be ‘enemies of the people’, which can include any dissenting voices – those of women, Black people, Indigenous peoples and LGBTQI+ people. In the case of women, they are trying to re-domesticate us, to send us back home, subservient to the command and judgement of patriarchs. Control over reproduction and our bodies is a crucial part of this strategy.

What are the forces for and against sexual and reproductive rights in Brazil?

The main force against sexual and reproductive rights is religious fundamentalism, which positions itself as a harbinger of control over women’s bodies and gender dissidents and is strongly represented in the National Congress. The defence of these rights lies in the progressive camp, represented by the political left and the feminist, women’s and LGBTQI+ movements.

But it’s worth noting that even with a Congress besieged by anti-rights groups, most people have a less punitive and more empathetic understanding of feminist struggles and women’s rights. A survey we carried out in 2023, in collaboration with the Observatory of Sex and Politics and the Centre for Studies and Public Opinion of the State University of Campinas, showed that 59 per cent were against the criminalisation and possible imprisonment of women who have abortions.

What are the main demands of the Brazilian feminist movement?

The feminist movement is plural and diverse, but what it has in common is the fight to end all forms of violence against women. CFEMEA seeks to transform the world through anti-racist feminism and by taking a stand against all gender inequalities and oppression. This is our position when we enter dialogue with society and make demands of governments. We demand public policies that reduce inequalities between men, women and people with other gender identities, considered in their intersectional dimensions of age, creed, ethnicity, nationality, physical abilities and race, among others.

A fundamental issue is the sexual and racial division of labour, a powerful structure that maintains and exacerbates the inequalities experienced by women. After all, the care work they do, despite being rendered invisible and devalued by patriarchal capitalism, is an indispensable condition for human life and the construction of collective good living. The manifesto of the Anti-Racist Feminist Forum for a National Care Policy, signed by dozens of movements and organisations, affirms the need for social reproduction activities to be recognised and shared by the state. This means that care work, which is currently unpaid and done at the family and community levels almost exclusively by women, must be effectively taken over by the state, because care is a human need.

We demand that governments allocate public investment to combat gender inequalities in areas as diverse as care, culture, education, the environment, health, justice, labour, leisure and wellbeing. It is the state, not the market, that can and must combat such inequalities.

Civic space in Brazil is rated ‘obstructed’ by the CIVICUS Monitor.

Get in touch with CFEMEA via its website or its Facebook or Instagram page, and follow @cfemea on Twitter.

  Source