View previous stories
	Water justice groups denounce World Water Forum''s "Citizen''s Process" by Maude Barlow Council of Canadians   April 2017   A letter I sent to the organizers of the Citizens’ Process at the World Water Forum, April 25, 2017.   A few weeks ago, I received an invitation to participate in the preparatory meeting for the World Water Forum’s “Citizens’ Process” that is taking place today, April 25 in Brazilia. I understand that this meeting is part of the World Water Council’s effort to coordinate global civil society organizations in advance of the World Water Forum taking place in 2018 in Brazil.   I am writing to explain why I and the undersigned organizations will not be accepting the invitation to participate at this meeting or in any future process associated with the World Water Forum.   As global water justice organizations, we have long opposed the role of the World Water Forum in promoting the privatization and commodification of water. The World Water Forum is not a legitimate policymaking space. It is a corporate trade show organized by the World Water Council – a multi-stakeholder consortium promoting solutions to the water crisis that serve the interests of multinational corporations.   We are appalled that United Nations agencies and governments from around the world would lend any credibility to the World Water Forum as a decision-making platform by participating in it. Public funds should not be spent on mega private sector conventions.   We call instead for a genuinely democratic global forum that will address the global water crisis by promoting policies aimed at implementing the human rights to water and sanitation and protecting freshwater as part of the global commons.   Water policies should not be discussed or drafted behind closed doors at expensive corporate trade shows. Multinational corporations whose actions are responsible for the destruction of watersheds or for the denial of access to the most vulnerable populations must not be rewarded with a seat at the decision-making table.   As water justice advocates we will not lend our voices to the corporate policy forum by participating in the event or in any of the preparatory processes. Instead, we will support activities organized by local Brazilian groups in solidarity with campaigns challenging the Temer government’s agenda to sell off public water and sanitation utilities and freshwater supplies in Brazil. http://bit.ly/2z28mNb   May 2017   Report - Water For Sale   How Free Trade And Investment Agreements Threaten Environmental Protection Of Water And Promote The Commodification Of The World''s Water.   In Water for Sale Maude Barlow explores how modern free trade and investment agreements impede the ability of people and their governments to maintain environmental laws and regulations to protect their water. She also shows how trade agreements advance the privatization and commodification of water. Free trade has become a crucial tool to help transnational capital and transnational corporations influence government policy in their favour.   Recently, corporations have used trade and investment agreements to challenge public control of water and to bring water into the market system where it is subject to strict corporate-friendly trade rules.   Water For Sale examines how free trade and investment agreements are promoting the commodification of the world’s water and argues that if the 2010 UN resolution recognizing water as a human right is to be realized, water in all its forms must be removed from all such deals forever.   The World Health Organization recently issued a dire warning that 2 billion people are drinking contaminated water. Water for Sale highlights how this crisis could be made even worse if deals like NAFTA, CETA, the TPP and the free trade model as a whole, aren’t abandoned once and for all.   “Modern free trade and investment agreements undermine laws and regulations to protect water. To protect water in international trade dealings, water must be removed in all these categories from all trade and investment agreements,” says Barlow.   “The practice and privilege of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) must end. People and their governments must be given the right to restrict trade from places or in conditions where water and local communities have been harmed. Foreign investors must return to using the domestic courts of the countries in which they are operating and with whom they have a dispute. The political moment to have this debate has arrived.”   Water for Sale highlights three ways that free trade deals endanger water: commodifying water as a tradeable “good”; treating water as a “service”, which promotes the privatization of water services; and treating water as an “investment”, subject to the clauses in these agreements that let corporations challenge water protection laws.   “The backlash against ISDS provisions in the new generation of trade and investment agreements is growing, and not just among civil society,” says Barlow.   “Many countries have either rejected ISDS outright or have expressed serious reservations about it.”   * Access the report: http://canadians.org/wfs Visit the related web page
	UN human rights expert panel backs US schools over ban on “offensive” slavery textbook by Ricardo Sunga UN Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent USA   Jan. 2017   A United Nations team of human rights experts has backed a United States school district which removed an “offensive” textbook on slavery from classrooms.   The UN Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent said the example set by Norwalk School District in Connecticut should be followed across the US and other countries.   “The Connecticut Adventure” was being studied by pupils aged nine and ten until district officials removed it on the grounds that its depiction of slavery was inaccurate, simplistic and offensive. The book says slaves in Connecticut were often treated like family members, and were “taught to be Christian” and sometimes how to read and write.   “The chapter discussing the history of slavery in Connecticut is a distortion of the true nature of enslavement,” said human rights expert Ricardo Sunga, who currently heads the expert panel set up by the Human Rights Council to study racial discrimination worldwide.   “Enslaved people in Connecticut, like those in the American South before the civil war, were trafficked against their will, had their fundamental right to life, liberty and property taken away from them, faced similar levels of exploitation, and were subjected to the most dehumanizing treatment imaginable,” Mr. Sunga said.   Students of history needed to know that enslaved people were never categorized as “family”, he added.   The Working Group is urging other Departments of Education and school districts in the US and other countries to review textbooks and other educational materials, to see whether they depict slavery accurately, and where appropriate to remove them from classrooms.   “These deeply offensive texts should be replaced with accurate depictions of history which convey the message of the inherent dignity and equality of all human beings,” Mr. Sunga stressed.   “Educators and publishers have a responsibility to ensure that textbooks and other educational materials accurately reflect historical facts on tragedies and atrocities, in particular slavery, the transatlantic trade in African people, and colonialism,” he added.   “This will avoid stereotypes and the distortion or falsification of these historical facts, which may lead to racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, Afrophobia and related intolerance,” the human rights expert concluded.   * Access the latest news from UN Special Rapporteurs in Geneva: http://bit.ly/2fiv258 Visit the related web page
	View more stories