Protecting Survivors and Witnesses

               This post is a summary of the article published in 2016 with the title above at   https://www.newtactics.org/conversation/protecting-survivors-and-witnesses

               Protecting survivors and witnesses of human rights violations is crucial to effective human rights work. Protection is important because when victims and witnesses fear further persecution, they are unlikely to report their experiences, making redress and accountability much more difficult. The state is formally responsible for providing protection, but it is the state that is often the greatest source of perceived risk amongst witnesses and survivors. Under Article 13 of the U.N.Convention Against Torture (UNCAT), the State have an obligation to ensure that victims and witnesses are protected against "all ill treatment and intimidation as a consequence of his complaint or any evidence given." On Article 14 of UNCAT states that the States have the obligation to ensure victims obtain rehabilitation through a State-run facility. Civil society has an important role to play in ensuring protection of survivors and victims through civil society groups. As victims are inclined to approach NGOs for protection, NGOs ought to be equipped with good protection practice. At times, NGOs who work directly with the victims of human rights violations become themselves witnesses and victims and need protection. One way of protecting witnesses and victims is by recognizing the suffering of these victims and educating civil society to understand the value of these efforts on society. The media plays a significant role in this. The international community can play a vital role in applying pressure on governments to provide adequate protection. Broader alliances need to be built between different sectors of civil society.  Sometimes networks are crucial in terms of providing victims a safe house or to flee to another location within the country or to another country. Communication between human rights defenders and victims is equally important to give an assurance of protection. The importance of documentation of human rights abuses is essential. Documentation would assist in analyzing the 'trend of cases' to prepare wider 'advocacy strategy' to deal with the security concerns of victims and witnesses. The importance of support from international NGOs to human rights defenders, victims and witnesses is also essential. The types of risk can be categorized broadly into three types of risk, physical, phychological and digital. Economic risk could also be added. It is important to ensure that victims and witnesses have as much information as possible so that they are in the best position to assess their own risk. Hope, honor and dignity must put forward as a way to manage risk and to empower victims. The risk of vicarious trauma and the importance of self care must also be discussed. The role of international organizations such as U.N. and the E.U. in protecting victims were raised. But the State has the ultimate responsibility in providing protection but often it is the primary source of threat. This is where the role of civil society organizations play an important bridging role between the State and the victims by advocacy when States fail to meet their obligations. Recommendations that the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights provide to their Human Rights Office (HROs) when they travel to different countries to investigate violations provide useful suggestions. Protective measures by HROs can include: 1) Strengthening the cooperation person's capacity for self-protection; 2) Supporting or establishing community-level protection networks; 3) Using visibility strategies with a deterrent effect; 4) Seeking the support of international mechanisms, such as NGOs, diplomatic missions, U.N. agencies; 5) Mobilizing efforts to directly or indirectly provide physical protection to the person at risk, including through relocation; 6) Limiting the capacity of the source of the threat to carry out an attack by reducing the vulnerability factors of the person at risk; 7) Intervening to influence or requesting an influential person to intervene with the source of the threat; 8) Increasing the political and social costs to the source carrying out the threat through, for instance, public advocacy in partnership with national and international networks. The costs of carrying out the threat should outweigh the benefits; 9) Advocacy and engagement with national authorities, stressing their human rights obligations, including their duty to protect those at risk and to prosecute offenders; 10) Capacity-building and technical cooperation directed at developing or improving national witness protection capacities, as well as accountability mechanisms.       When weighing the pros and cons of the different protective measures, HROs should consider the following: 1) the effectiveness of such measures in guaranteeing protection; 2) Their promptness in responding to the security needs of the person at risk, including emergencies; 3) Their sustainability, particularly for protective measures that envisage long-term changes; 4) Their adaptability to new circumstances, such as deteriorating security conditions; 5) Their reversibility when the risk disappears (for example, in case of relocation, the person being able to return home).