5 months ago the U.N. Human Rights Council completed 20 years-old. Precisely on 15th of Match. Once again I'd like to thank everybody participating and sharing this worldwide movement for justice and my political rights. Unfortunately this year for the third time, some people didn't allow me to be a candidate, but the worldwide movement carry on, because for while I haven't had any justice i need and deserve and neither my political rights respected. And the world fairly thinks that this worldwide movement must carry on. This post is a summary of two articles. The first was published at https://www.civicus.org/index.php/media-resources/news/8124-un-human-rights-council-at-20-rights-and-civil-society-under-attack. The second was published at https://genevasolutions.news/human-rights/20-years-on-the-human-rights-council-wrestles-with-old-dilemmas
As its 20th anniversary dawns, amid declining UN commitment to human rights and a crisis in multilateral cooperation. The global civil society alliance is calling for stronger and sustained Council action to prevent human rights violations and abuses. It calls for stepping up efforts to address unfolding crises, from Iran to Venezuela, where some of the most egregious violations are taking place. Following recent UN budget cuts, over 100 staff positions at the UN Human Rights Office will be lost. The UN human rights pillar accounts for only 5% of the total UN regular budget. The culling of rights spending reduces its ability to monitor abuses, protect civil society, and help states strengthen human rights systems. "Citizens and activists, including victims and survivors of grave rights violations, should be given a stronger voice at the UN. They must not be silenced in the name of efficiency due to ongoing financial crises. Defending human rights and civic space is a priority, " said Sigrid Lipott, UN Advisor at CIVICUS. Civil society must be involved in creating a new human rights system. A lack of involvement may weaken accountability instead of reinforcing human rights standards, narratives and partners. Civil societymust be able to hold states accountable safely and amplify local voices. Polarisation is increasing between States that support or oppose human rights funding, civic space, and multilateralism.
The UN Huamn Rights Council has forged a reputation as the world's top authority on human rights. Its 20th anniversary this year arrives at its most challenging time yet, Squeezed between political and financial crises, the Geneva-based body has not only been affected by budget restrictions but also increasingly weighed down by accusations of political bias, double standards and inefficiency. Those accused of human rights abuses accuse it of targeting them unfairly, while others lambast it for allowing autocratic states where abuses are rife to hold one of its prized 47 seats. The Human Rights Commission had been around since 1946. But over the years, it became synonymous with polarisation and paralysis. "The commission sessions were marathon-like and had become very aggressive. Groups formed and were very consolidated," remembers Luis Alfonso de Alba. "The average time to adopt a document was 10 years, anyone could veto anything," he says. Civil society participation was merely symbolic. De Alba recalls victims coming for the single day of the commission single session in the year when civil society was allowed to speak. The council was meant to correct those failures. De Alba, who was appointed as the council's first president and is credited with being one of its main architects, knew what had to change for that to be possible. Among his first acts was kicked out regional groups from the council bereau and invited civil society to all sessions, reserving them a slot to speak. Accusations of bias followed the council from the start. Hassan Shire director of the Uganda-based NGO Defend Defenders thinks that countries playing politics have distracted the council from its primary mission: addressing human rights issues and preventing them from becoming crises. Bloc politics have also re-emerged, with regional groups and political alliances coordinating positions and providing cover for each other. Twenty years on, the council remains a paradox. While it is more flexible and inclusive than its predecessor, it continues to operate within the same logic of bloc politics, double standards and heavy bureaucracy. For now, countries have made thier bets: at its nost recent review last month, they agreed that it should remain for the next five years.
No comments:
Post a Comment