2009.04 - Navigating the UN in Geneva

Navigating the UN in Geneva

by Solen Lees Gratiet

Between the 16th and 27th March 2009, I attended a course entitled Advanced Geneva Training Course in Human Rights Law and Advocacy at the International Service for Human Rights.

As its name suggests, the course, aimed at non governmental organisations (NGOs), was very much centred on international legal provisions surrounding Human Rights, and also provided practical tips on how to use the systems and mechanisms set up by the United Nations to advocate on issues of concern in the field of human rights.

The International Service for Human Rights

The International Service for Human Rights (ISHR) has its secretariat in Geneva and a small office with two staff in New York. According to its director, Isabelle Scherer, its role is to monitor and report in a detached and analytical way on the Human Rights Council (HRC), the Treaty Bodies, and Advisory Council and the Universal Periodic Review. It also engages closely with the Office of the High Commission for Human Rights (OHCHR) and the High Commissioner herself, Navanethem Pillay.

Crucially, for us, its principal function is to provide information and advice to civil society working in the defence of human rights. Unlike campaigning organisations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch it does not lobby on particular countries but does lobby for the rights of Human Rights Defenders. For example, it has been instrumental in promoting and supporting the mandate of the UN Special Rapporteur for Human Rights Defenders.

The importance of UN involvement

 Why is it important for NGOs to get involved at the UN level? This is a question many NGOs ask themselves in the face of a gargantuan, political and bureaucratic organisation which moves slowly and not always in the right direction. According to Ms Scherer, it is indispensable to get involved, and to use the mechanisms in a strategic way, in order to help victims of human rights violations be heard, to help in standard-setting at an international level, and to persuade States to follow up on their human rights obligations.

In SDIA’s and WSA’s case, it is important to remain involved, because although it can sometimes seem like swimming in mud, we are well-placed, as a wide-reaching network both thematically and geographically, to instigate changes on different levels - and important changes can come out of participation in the UN.

For SDIA, a crucial step in our involvement, and in line with our mission and guiding principles, should be to inform and support our members to be aware of the different approaches, and to encourage a rights-based approach to development that does not see the poor, vulnerable and marginalised as persons in need of “charity”, but as rights holders, equal with all other citizens. SDIA has a role in helping our projects move from a “charity” model in which poverty and inequality are seen as “personal” failures, towards a rights-based model where lack of access to basic goods and services is seen as systemic failure by the state and powerful groups to ensure protection of the full range of human rights.

Main axes of the training

The training provided participants with a comprehensive overview of the UN Human Rights system and its different mechanisms, with an emphasis on how NGOs can access and use them strategically to greatest effect.

First we learned how the Human Rights mechanisms and bodies fit into the UN system as a whole, and then we concentrated on each mechanism in turn.

Thus, we had sessions on the Charter-based bodies, which are:

• The Human Rights Council – set up in 2006 to replace the Commission on Human Rights which was considered too politicised and ineffective and not frequent enough. The Human Rights Council has perhaps not changed as much as some parties (notably NGOs) may have wished, and it is still heavily politicised, but it does have more tools for NGO interaction, and State parties now have to compete for election rather than it being automatic which in itself gives scope and opportunity for influencing governments;
• .
• The Special Procedures – special procedures include country mandates and thematic mandates. These mandates allow for a Special Rapporteur (or an Independent Expert or a Working Group) to monitor, advise and report on a specific issue or a specific country. Unfortunately there are now fewer country mandates than before, because they are by nature sensitive and political. There are now 30 thematic mandates, though, on issues as wide ranging as arbitrary detention, the right to education, freedom of religion or belief, and violence against women.
• The Universal Periodic Review (UPR) – this is seen as the most innovative mechanism of the Human Rights Council, and did not exist under the Commission. It determines that all UN Member States will periodically undergo a human rights review (every four years). Although it does not adequately replace the lost country mandates, as the UPR does not give resolutions as an outcome, it nonetheless creates a space for civil society to engage in advocacy in every member state of the UN.

We also looked at the treaty-based bodies, or treaty-monitoring bodies, which are committees of independent experts that monitor the implementation of the United Nations human rights treaties by States parties. They do this by reviewing reports submitted periodically by governments on steps taken to implement treaty provisions. Thus, for example, the

• Committee on the Rights of the Child monitors the implementation of the convention on the Rights of the Child and its Optional Protocols, and the
• Committee against Torture monitors the implementation of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. There are currently nine treaty bodies and a tenth in the pipeline.

We were also provided with practical information of how to access information on different relevant websites, and had special sessions on lesbian, gay and trans rights, on minority issues, and lively and illuminating “interactive dialogues” with the head of the permanent mission of Ireland and with the Special Rapporteur on the DPRK (North Korea), Vitit Muntarbhorn, who revealed that for him, being a human rights defender was spiritual work. I could identify with that! One day was almost entirely consecrated to the subject of Human Rights Defenders (HRDs) and covered who is a HRD, the Declaration on HRDs and specific mechanisms for the protection of HRDs.

One thing that I came away with, and which seems particularly relevant to the work SDIA does around the world is that you do not have to be an activist in a campaigning organisation to be a Human Rights Defender, we can all be Human Rights Defenders. This may seem obvious, but it means that a teacher in a developing country who works on human rights education or who works towards equal educational opportunities for girls, a medical professional who treats people in all sides of a conflict, a journalist who reports critically on her government’s actions in suppressing a demonstration – they are all human rights defenders.

I feel that if SDIA members consider they are doing rights-based work rather than administering charity, a logical next step is for them to engage on some level in advocacy and in lobbying governments, where possible, to redress situations of concern to them where they see that rights are being violated.

This could be done in many ways:

• Through the four-yearly Universal Periodic Review by contributing to the stakeholder report of the member’s country. A state is not providing free primary education for all? Then in should be in the report.
• Or communications can be made through the Special Procedures mechanisms on a wide variety of issues. For example, if a minority population is not enjoying its right to clean water, they could use the mandate on access to clean water and sanitation or the mandate on minority issues (or both) to bring their case to international attention.
• Or more use could be made of our UN Human Rights Council representatives who can make either written or oral statements when relevant, and engage in informal lobbying of council members (in the corridors of power!).
• Treaty bodies can also be used by NGOs in multiple ways. For example if a country has signed up to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, why are there still so many child labourers in the area a member is working in? Written information can be submitted to treaty bodies to keep them abreast of the situation on the ground. If civil society does not do it, who will?
• On another level, SDIA could join campaigns such as the campaign for an optional protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child which would allow for communications, or complaints, to be made. (This is possible with some treaties but not others).

In-country work at a national level is just as important as lobbying in international forums and follow-up is vital. If a country has agreed to change or implement legislation as a result of advocacy, it is indispensable to monitor the situation “back home” to see if it really happens, and follow-up if not. The media can also be used to highlight developments, particularly at crucial moments such as when a country is reviewed under the UPR process, and can be a great way to educate and to mobilise support.


Action Project

One of the most useful components of the course was the “Action Project” that participants were expected to complete and present on the penultimate day.

As my participation was funded by SDIA and WSA as part of a strategy to maximise our participation in the UN and to make the most of our ECOSOC consultative status, I feel I have a responsibility to put to use what I acquired in these two weeks in my future work with SDIA. Thus the action project was a great way of distilling practical knowledge and answering the very valid question: “How do I intend to use the information gained?”

The focus of other participants’ projects included participating in the Universal Periodic Review of their country, training Women Human Rights Defenders on using special procedures, and developing a lobbying strategy within a gay-rights organisation.

My project, entitled “Training for grassroots member projects on a Rights-based Approach to Development and Human Rights Advocacy”, aims to conduct regional training among our members on the different advocacy tools and mechanisms they can access, starting with an informational workshop in Spain in May and going on to develop training / awareness-raising in the field.

We presented our projects in small groups, and got valuable feedback from our fellow participants and tutor, who took on the role of potential funders. This was a great way of testing our project’s coherence and of practising fielding difficult questions.

And finally…

Last but not least, the course was a fantastically enriching (and humbling) experience because of the brave and dedicated people present – both participants and trainers – who came with their own experiences, issues, outlooks and personalities. There were over 300 hundred applicants, of which 24 were chosen, so participants all considered ourselves extremely fortunate to be there.

We shared two very intense and intensive weeks with tears, laughter (lots of it), sunshine, snow, wine and food, as well as ideas and inspiration. Not only do I now have a network of contacts of people with whom to share professional experiences and information, but I also have places to stay in Thailand, Malaysia, Uzbekistan, Tanzania, Brazil, Fiji, Lebanon and more …

What an experience! Thanks so much to those who made it possible.