Remembering Jimmy Carter: a UN Perspective

Armed Conflicts, Children on the Frontline, Civil Society, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, Health, Human Rights, Humanitarian Emergencies, International Justice, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Carter was a man of decency and integrity who devoted his life to promoting peace and democracy. Credit: Courtesy Kul Chandra Gautam

 
Former US President Jimmy Carter, a leader of impeccable integrity and decency who devoted his life to promoting peace and democracy worldwide. I recall his contribution to the peace process in Nepal and his leadership in combatting deadly diseases in Africa.
 
Jimmy Carter enthusiastically supported the child survival campaign led by UNICEF. He had nominated Jim Grant to be the Executive Director of UNICEF and said that it was one of the most important decisions of his presidency.

KATHMANDU, Nepal, Jan 2 2025 (IPS) – Former American President Jimmy Carter was a man of peace and principles. He presided over a tumultuous period in American history from 1977 to 1981, working hard to restore trust in government after the Watergate scandal and the divisive era of the Vietnam War. He brokered a landmark peace deal between Israel and Egypt and negotiated a historic treaty to hand over the Panama Canal to Panama.


Carter, a champion of human rights both in the US and around the world, passed away at 100 on December 29, 2024.

More than any recent American president, Carter pressed gently but firmly on autocratic regimes worldwide to respect human rights and the rule of law. When he led the country with immense moral authority, it encouraged many human rights advocates, while dictators worried about the US sanctions.

At home, Carter got many progressive legislations passed in areas of consumer protection, welfare reforms and the appointment of women and minorities in America’s judiciary. However, he had difficulties managing the US economy, the Iran hostage crisis and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. And in the 1980 Presidential election, when he lost his bid to Ronald Reagan, his active political career came to an end.

Kul Chandra Gautam

But he didn’t retire to a comfortable life, rather, he embarked on a noble mission as one of the world’s highly respected elder statesmen, deeply committed to promoting democracy and human rights. He founded the Carter Center with a motto of “Waging Peace, Fighting Disease and Building Hope”.

With his team, he worked tirelessly to help resolve conflicts, monitor elections and improve human health through campaigns to eliminate several neglected diseases afflicting the poorest people worldwide, particularly in Africa.

“For his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights and to promote economic and social development,” Carter won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002.

Links with UNICEF and Nepal

Carter greatly admired UNICEF Executive Director James Grant and strongly supported the UNICEF-led global child survival and development campaign. Further, the organisation was a key partner in the Carter-led global campaign to eradicate a debilitating disease called dracunculiasis or Guinea-worm disease.

My first substantive meeting with Carter took place on August 3, 1995, at an event in Washington, DC, organised jointly by the Carter Center, USAID, WHO and UNICEF to mark the 95 percent reduction in Guinea worm cases worldwide and to recommit to its total eradication. I had a long and fruitful discussion with Carter on strengthening our collaboration in the global campaign to eradicate Guinea-worm disease.

In February 2004, I joined President Carter and WHO Director-General JW Lee on a 3-day field visit to observe and advocate for Guinea-worm eradication in Ghana. I learned about Carter’s humble personality, deep commitment to many worthy causes and impressive advocacy skills.

In our informal interactions, we often talked about Nepal.

Carter’s involvement in Nepal

Carter visited Nepal twice to observe Nepal’s Constituent Assembly Elections. He advised Nepali leaders, including the Election Commission, based on his worldwide experience and credibility in observing elections and conflict resolution. Over the years, the Carter Center produced several reports on Nepal dealing with issues related to the peace process, challenges in drafting Nepal’s Constitution and other important issues of social justice and equity.

I instinctively supported Carter’s noble efforts to promote peace, democracy and development. However, like everybody else, Carter was human and fallible, and some aspects of the Carter Center’s reports on Nepal were flawed.

In particular, Carter’s hasty verdict that Nepal’s first Constituent Assembly election was free, fair and peaceful ignored the fact that there was an unusually high degree of intimidation in many rural constituencies. The non-Maoist parties’ candidates were prevented from campaigning, and voters were threatened with physical violence for weeks preceding the actual voting.

There were well-intentioned but inaccurate analyses of Nepal’s socio-political dynamics by the Carter Center, the International Crisis Group, and even the United Nations. In their effort to appear “balanced and even-handed”, they gave the undue benefit of the doubt to the progressive-sounding rhetoric of the Maoists, ignoring their violent and corrupt practices.

Carter witnessed the insincerity and duplicity of the Maoists when they initially welcomed the 2013 election for the second Constituent Assembly but then denounced it as rigged and unfair when the results showed that they had suffered a humiliating loss.

Unlike during the first CA election, Carter took the necessary time to analyse the second CA election better. He left somewhat sobered by a deeper understanding of the Maoists’ opportunistic and undemocratic nature.

A man of faith and integrity

Jimmy Carter was a deeply religious and spiritual man who often turned to his faith during his political career. But as a progressive man and defender of human rights and gender equality, he found himself at odds with his Southern Baptist Church when it opposed gender equality, citing a few selected verses from the Bible that women must be “subservient” to their husbands and must not be allowed to serve as priests.

Carter protested and took a painful decision to sever ties with his Baptist Church, saying that parts of its rigid doctrine violated the basic premises of his Christian faith. He wrote to his fellow Baptists and published an op-ed article “Losing my religion for equality”.

Carter had a philosophical and spiritual perspective on death. As he suffered from multiple bouts of cancer treatment, he remarked, “I didn’t ask God to let me live, but I just asked God to give me a proper attitude toward death. I found that I was absolutely and completely at ease with death”.

May Carter’s noble soul rest in eternal peace.

Source: Kathmandu Post, Nepal

Kul Chandra Gautam is a distinguished diplomat, development professional, and a former senior official of the United Nations. Currently, he serves on the Boards of several international and national organizations, charitable foundations and public-private partnerships. Previously, he served in senior managerial and leadership positions with the UN in several countries and continents in a career spanning over three decades. As a former Deputy Executive Director of UNICEF and Assistant Secretary-General of the United Nations, he has extensive experience in international diplomacy, development cooperation and humanitarian assistance.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Breaking Latin America’s Cycle of Low Growth and Violence

Civil Society, Economy & Trade, Global Governance, Headlines, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, Latin America & the Caribbean, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Credit: Syldavia/iStock by Getty Images via IMF

WASHINGTON DC, Dec 12 2024 (IPS) – Violent crime and insecurity have a disproportionate impact on Latin America and the Caribbean, with severe consequences for socioeconomic development.


Despite representing just 8% of the world’s population, the region accounts for nearly one-third of global homicides. This as well as other alarming statistics highlight the urgent need for comprehensive strategies to address the far-reaching effects of crime and violence.

New research by the IDB and IMF highlights how crime, insecurity and low growth reinforce each other in a vicious cycle that stifles investment, reduces tourism, and accelerates emigration.

Macroeconomic instability—recessions, inflation spikes, and rising inequality—is associated with increased violence. Easily available firearms and organized crime amplify these effects, undermining institutions and the rule of law.

Quantifying the Costs of Crime

A recent IDB paper quantifies the direct losses, estimating that crime and violence cost the region 3.4 percent of GDP annually. These costs stem from productivity losses due to lives lost, injuries, and imprisonment; private-sector expenditures on security; and public spending on police, justice, and prisons.

This is equivalent to 80 percent of the region’s public education budgets and double its social assistance spending. But the impact of crime doesn’t end there. It discourages investment, reduces tourism, and drives emigration, further weakening economic resilience and constraining the region’s future growth.

IMF research reveals that crime hampers innovation and reduces firm productivity, compounding economic stagnation over time. Leveraging geo-localized data on nightlights, the study finds that halving homicide rates in violent municipalities could increase their economic output by up to 30 percent.

At the regional level, as shown in last year’s IMF research, reducing homicide rates to the global average could boost Latin America and the Caribbean’s annual GDP growth by 0.5 percentage points.

Conversely, macroeconomic instability often fuels spikes in violence: a recession in LAC is associated with a 6 percent increase in homicides the following year, while inflation spikes above 10 percent are linked to a 10 percent rise in homicides the year after. Growing inequality further exacerbates the link between economic stagnation and crime.

How can policymakers help break the cycle?

Breaking this vicious circle requires a deeper understanding of its root causes and impacts. Rigorous research and better data are essential for designing public policies that effectively reduce crime. Institutions like the IDB and IMF can generate evidence, monitor crime dynamics, advise member countries, and facilitate discussions.

As the topic has become macro critical in the region, the institutions brought together experts and policymakers in a joint conference a few weeks back.

First, sound economic policy plays a preventive role. Stability, low inflation, robust social safety nets, and opportunities that reduce inequality and expand access to education and employment are critical to breaking the cycle of violence and stagnation.

Financial authorities are also uniquely positioned to weaken criminal networks by addressing illicit markets, curtailing financial flows, and tackling money laundering—cutting off resources that sustain organized crime.

Second, because the impact of crime extends far beyond direct economic costs, economic policymakers must adopt a broader role by targeting high-risk groups, improving crime monitoring, and enhancing interagency coordination.

Effective interventions can deliver transformative results. With IMF support, Jamaica implemented reforms that protected public investment and social spending while successfully halving debt between 2012 and 2022. Community-based interventions supported by the IDB reduced gang violence in 68% of affected neighborhoods.

In Rosario province, Argentina implemented a comprehensive strategy to combat crime, including territorial control of high-risk neighborhoods by the Federal Police, stricter prison systems for high-profile offenders, and collective prosecution of criminal groups under new legislation like the anti-mafia law.

These efforts, alongside progress on a juvenile penal code to deter drug traffickers from recruiting minors, have led to 65% reduction homicides in 11 months. In Honduras, strategic security reforms contributed to a 14% decline in the homicide rate and an 8% increase in public confidence in law enforcement.

Policymakers must prioritize using resources effectively, given the scope of the challenge. Public spending on security in the region is already high—around 1.9 percent of GDP, or 7.4 percent of total public expenditure—and may be even greater where the military and subnational governments are involved.

Finance ministers and fiscal authorities need a full understanding of these costs, covering police, courts, prisons, and related institutions, to ensure funds are allocated efficiently to areas with the highest impact. They also need to monitor them in the same way they surveil other large spending tickets, evaluating their impact and pressing for results.

Transnational Crime Demands Regional Cooperation

Tackling crime solely at the national level isn’t sufficient. Criminal groups operate across borders, making isolated responses ineffective and fragmented. To address this shared challenge, countries must collaborate more closely to develop stronger, more coordinated solutions.

Recognizing the transnational nature of crime, the IDB’s Alliance for Security, Justice, and Development seeks to unite governments, civil society, and private-sector actors. This alliance not only aims to strengthen institutions and enhance cooperation but also supports public policies and mobilizes resources to implement evidence-based solutions that effectively combat organized crime and violence.

Regional collaboration is crucial for disrupting the sophisticated, interconnected networks of organized crime that undermine the rule of law and economic stability. By fostering unified efforts, institutions like the IMF and IDB alongside governments and civil society, have a critical role to play in this effort.

With people’s lives on the line, the true impact of these efforts must be felt on the ground—by creating safer streets, restoring hope in communities, and offering individuals a real chance to thrive economically in a future free from violence.

Ilan Goldfajn was elected president of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) on November 20, 2022, and took office on December 19, 2022. He previously served as director of the Western Hemisphere Department at the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in 2022, where he supported countries in implementing IMF programs and contributed to climate change policy dialogue. Earlier, he was an economist at the IMF from 1996 to 1999.

Rodrigo Valdés, a national of Chile, is director of the Western Hemisphere Department since May 2023. Prior to this, Rodrigo was a professor of economics in the School of Government at the Catholic University of Chile. He also held the position of Chile’s Minister of Finance from 2015 to 2017. At the IMF, he also was a deputy director of the IMF European and WHD departments.

Source: IMF Blog

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

This Year Saw Most of the World Repressed – but in Civil Society there is Hope

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

Opinion

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile. Credit: United Nations

NEW YORK, Dec 10 2024 (IPS) – Today is International Human Rights Day, Normally, it should be an occasion to celebrate the work of those who strive to create peaceful, just, equal and sustainable societies. But conditions for human rights defenders and their organisations to operate freely are extremely challenging around the world.


Almost three quarters of the world’s people live in states that severely constrain civic freedoms. These are the latest findings from the CIVICUS Monitor, a cross-continental research collaboration between over twenty civil society organisations.

Despite enormous technological and cultural advancements claimed by humankind the overwhelming majority of the world’s population are being actively denied agency to shape the decisions that impact their lives. Major restrictions in law and practice on the fundamental civic freedoms of peaceful assembly, association and expression are putting journalists and civil society activists at serious risk of persecution when they expose high level corruption or critique the actions of powerful decision makers.

Civic space conditions in some 30 countries where over a quarter of the world’s population live are so poor that even the slightest hint of dissent against those who hold power can get one thrown into prison for a long time or even killed. Such countries include Afghanistan, China, Cuba, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Myanmar, Nicaragua, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Sudan among others.

This year, Eswatini, Ethiopia and the Occupied Palestinian Territories of Gaza and the West Bank have been downgraded to the worst ‘closed’ rating on the CIVICUS Monitor due to an acceleration in repression there.

As a human rights defender it worries me that countries with proud histories of resisting colonial oppression and with hard won constitutional commitments to democratic principles such as India, Kenya, Mexico and the Philippines have ended up being placed in the second worst ‘repressed’ category on the CIVICUS Monitor.

As a development advocate who campaigned for the adoption of an ambitious set of universal Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015, it concerns me that governments are deliberately limiting the ability of civil society organisations to work with them to create more equal and fairer societies.

Civic space restrictions negatively impact the quest for transparency, accountability and participation in public affairs. The Sustainable Development Goals include guarantees on access to information and fundamental freedoms as well as on responsive, inclusive and participatory decision making, which are essential for public spirited individuals and organisations to push for transformative changes in the political, social and economic spheres.

But CIVICUS Monitor researchers have recorded thousands of restrictions on the freedom of expression in 2024 including physical attacks on journalists and civil society activists merely for doing their work in the public interest.

Atefeh Rangriz, a defender of worker’s and women’s rights in Iran is currently languishing in prison on trumped up national security related charges. Guatemalan journalist Jose Ruben Zamora continues to be persecuted through the courts for exposing deep networks of patronage that exist among political and economic elites in that country.

Their cases are illustrative of the enormous challenge of thousands of journalists and civil society activists unjustly imprisoned around the world in countries as disparate as Belarus, Egypt, Israel and Vietnam.

The most recent CIVICUS Monitor Watchlist, released this September, draws attention to deterioration in civic space conditions in Argentina, Azerbaijan, Thailand and Zimbabwe, all of which are ruled by erratic authoritarian leaders. Because global civic space conditions are so challenging, including in several powerful states, the appetite of the international community to consistently call out flagrant violations of international law standards has been severely hamstrung in recent times.

It’s thus absurd that Azerbaijan, a petrostate with closed civic space, hosted the COP29 climate summit this year in an attempt to greenwash its reputation. The previous two COP summits were held in countries with equally appalling records: United Arab Emirates and Egypt. The election of Donald Trump, an avowed supporter of the fossil fuel industry, as the next president of the United States does not portend well for climate causes or for civic freedoms given his adulation for authoritarian leaders.

Climate justice, environmental and land rights activists are facing persecution in far too many countries for exercising their right to peaceful assembly. Earlier this year, five Just Stop Oil activists received sentences ranging from four to five years in prison in the United Kingdom for planning a non-violent protest action by blocking a motorway in 2022.

In Uganda, protestors were arrested merely for seeking to deliver a petition to the authorities outlining the adverse effects of an oil project including environmental degradation, land loss and violations of community rights. In September, Juan López, Honduran community leader and advocate for the rights of the Guapinol River, was assassinated despite calls for his protection.

Just as anti-apartheid protestors faced pushback in the 1980s, artists, students and academics have been targeted in several western democracies for advocating for the rights and dignity of the Palestinian people. It’s now forbidden to wear a keffiyeh within Canada’s Ontario state’s legislative assembly and there have been attempts to censor pro-Palestinian groups in Germany, the Netherlands and the USA. In Australia, four writers who had publicly opposed Israel’s war on Gaza had their workshops’ contracts terminated with the State Library of Victoria.

Nearly 10% of the total civic space violations documented globally in 2024 by CIVICUS Monitor researchers either took place in the Occupied Palestinian Territories or were perpetrated against those expressing solidarity with the Palestinian people. Despite this, throughout 2024 people continued to pour out onto the streets to express solidarity with beleaguered Palestinians. This in itself is extraordinary.

Even if global civic space conditions were mostly unwelcoming this year, civil society actions led to some remarkable victories for rights and justice. Greece became the first overwhelmingly Christian Orthodox country to legalise same-sex marriage while recognising the rights of same sex couples to adopt children. Thailand broke ground in Southeast Asia by passing a marriage equality bill in May 2024, making it the first country in the region to legalise same-sex marriage.

In the Czech Republic, civil society efforts led to a landmark reform in rape laws, now classifying any non-consensual sexual act as rape, removing the need for proof of force and strengthening protections for victims. In Kazakhstan, in response to a high-profile murder trial, lawmakers swiftly introduced new legislation that re-established criminal penalties for battery and enhanced protections for domestic violence survivors.

In Poland, a bill passed in February 2024 made emergency contraception accessible without a prescription, reversing a restrictive 2017 law and marking a significant win for womens’ rights over their bodies.

Moreover, people continued to exercise their protest rights across the globe this year. In Bangladesh, the longstanding oppressive government led by Sheikh Hasina was forced to step down following persistent public demonstrations against its regressive actions. In Venezuela, people outvoted the incumbent authoritarian government of Nicholas Maduro at the polls but his regime ended up rigging the election results. However, this doesn’t mean the struggle for democracy in Venezuela has been permanently suppressed.

“The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice,” said Dr.Martin Luther King Jr. As these examples show, despite pervasive repression, the impulse to overcome oppression remains alive. Gains made through sustained civil society resistance through 2024 offer us hope that no matter how powerful autocratic forces may be, there will always be an undercurrent of civil society ready to weather the storm and strive for a better world for all.

Mandeep S. Tiwana is the Interim Co-Secretary General. CIVICUS, the global civil society alliance.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Now it’s Officially the Israeli-American Genocide in Gaza

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

Opinion

The International Criminal Court (ICC) Headquarters in The Hague, Netherlands. Credit: ICC
 
ICC issues arrest warrants for Israel, Hamas leadership: what happens next?

ATLANTA, USA, Nov 27 2024 (IPS) – As of last week, in the wake of the Nov. 21 issuance by the International Criminal Court (ICC) of arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former IDF Defense chief Yoav Gallant, all eyes turned to Washington to see the what the response of Israel’s main backer would be.


The charges were for “Crimes Against Humanity” and “War Crimes” for using starvation as a method of warfare in Gaza, something is explicitly forbidden in international law. A HAMAS operative, Muhammad Deif, who may already be dead, was also charged. One would think that the US should find it easy to agree. But what was the message from the Biden White House?

Press spokesperson Karine Jean-Pierre said that the United States of America “Rejects the ICC ruling,” as if the International Criminal Court were just an off-beat punk yelling his head off in Lafayette Park just across from the presidential residence. But the prestigious court in the Hague has no option. It is bound to rule according to the law. It’s actions are neither political nor enacted on a whim.

The international law that created the treaty was endorsed by a host of national governments around the world—except for a few, Israel and the United States being the most prominent.

The US is not a State Party (signatory) to the ICC, even though 124 countries have signed the Rome Statute that created the ICC in 2002. Presidents Clinton and Obama tried to get ratification from the US Senate but failed. George W. Bush and the Neo-Cons flatly rejected the idea of endorsing the statute, not wanting any restrictions on their disastrous plan to attack Iraq.

Just the day before at the United Nations, the Security Council voted overwhelmingly 14-1 to demand a cease-fire in Gaza. But the US, by a single vote –because it has veto power under the rules set up in the wake of WW II—blocked the resolution.

The argument that a cease fire would help bring the hostages home, not hinder their release, was urged by the council but fell on deaf ears.

In a shameful action that will be long remembered throughout the world, the US representative, Deputy Ambassador Robert Wood, raised his hand to block the resolution. These two actions in the same week—flat out rejection of the ICC warrants and blocking a Security Council cease fire resolution intended to relieve massive human suffering, when taken together, mean not only that the United States is fully on board with the endless slaughter of civilians in Gaza under continuous Israeli bombing, but it now supports starving women and children too.

This is a stain that will not go away. Protestors in the streets and on university campuses have long been chanting, “Genocide Joe has got to go!” How out of touch is the near-senile President Biden? How corrupt, misguided, and inhumane do you have to be to make that decision, condemning the United States to be forever labeled as contributing to war crimes?

It’s true that Washington has long supplied arms to Israel, including during this conflict, but to support continued starvation and bombing of civilians as a matter of policy is much worse—either deliberately evil or insanity. No fancy negotiating tricks are allowed when innocent lives are at stake.

And where does the recent Democratic nominee for President, Vice President Kamala Harris, stand on all this? Does she have a voice within the Administration? She pledged repeatedly if elected to increase, not decrease, humanitarian aid to Gaza.

What’s wrong with advocating a cease fire after 13 months of massive, one-sided bloodletting that has killed and wounded nearly 150,000 people among the unfortunate citizens of Gaza?

Let’s define terms: A war is when both sides shoot at each other. A Turkey Shoot is different—the Turkey doesn’t have a chance, and sharpshooters just keep shooting to see who has the best aim. A slaughterhouse is when only one side has all the power and just keeps killing on a massive scale.

Israel’s troops have guns and bombs supplied by the United States, Germany, and the UK, and continues to shoot and bomb people in Gaza long after the other side has ceased firing. If the operation is a manhunt, call it a manhunt. If a reprisal, call it a reprisal. If ethnic cleansing, call it that. If the term “Warsaw Ghetto” is fitting, call it that. But don’t call it a righteous battle if the atrocities keep piling up on just one side with no sign of stopping.

Does anybody know how long it has been since HAMAS has fired rockets, or even machine guns at Israeli troops? You would think that if that were the case the slick Israeli lie machine would trumpet that information. So why not cease firing today, not tomorrow?

Why doesn’t the esteemed American President, “Genocide Joe,” just decide for once to do the right thing?

James E. Jennings, PhD is President of Conscience International, an aid organization that has worked in Gaza over many years.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Ensuring Violence-Free Homes for Sri Lankan Women

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

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