View previous stories
	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
	The Costs of International Advocacy - China’s Interference in United Nations Human Rights Mechanisms by Human Rights Watch, agencies   UN Body Freezing Out Human Rights Groups, by Louis Charbonneau. (Human Rights Watch)   It’s easy to assume that the United Nations Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) would support civil society groups and their work.   So imagine my shock when, as a journalist covering the UN in 2016, I saw the rough way the NGO Committee treated the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), a highly regarded New York-based media freedom group applying for UN accreditation.   Astonishingly, most NGO Committee member countries were openly hostile to civil society applicants. Ultimately, the NGO Committee rejected CPJ’s application, a four-year process that CPJ head Joel Simon described as “Kafkaesque.”   The NGO Committee’s antipathy towards independent rights groups is hardly a surprise. Many of the 19 committee members have been accused of human rights violations: Azerbaijan, Burundi, China, Cuba, Greece, Guinea, India, Iran, Israel, Mauritania, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Russia, South Africa, Sudan, Turkey, the US, Uruguay and Venezuela.   As governments worldwide shrink the space for civil society, it’s vital that the UN remain a forum where nongovernmental organizations can advocate for human rights and dignity, which the UN was created to protect. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has said civil society is "a key element in solving global problems.”   A few months after the NGO Committee rejected CPJ, the US brought its case to the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), to which the NGO Committee reports. ECOSOC voted to overturn the decision.   CPJ’s story is not unique. In the coming months the US will bring two more applications to ECOSOC, one a group focusing on human rights in Iran and another on North Korea. The NGO Committee has repeatedly deferred them, in one case since 2011. Canada and Australia have also appealed rejections to ECOSOC.   Human Rights Watch has documented China’s use of its membership in ECOSOC and the NGO Committee to prevent groups critical of China from getting UN accreditation.   ECOSOC should ensure swift decisions on nongovernmental organization applications and impose term limits for committee members. CBC news reported that Russia has been on the NGO Committee since 1946, while China, Cuba and Sudan have been on it for over 20 years.   Elections for the NGO Committee are set for April 2018. Governments that value the role of nongovernmental organizations in promoting respect for human rights should seek seats. It’s essential that the committee become a body that works with, not against, civil society.   http://www.hrw.org/news/2018/03/15/un-body-freezing-out-human-rights-groups   Sept. 2017   The Costs of International Advocacy - China’s Interference in United Nations Human Rights Mechanisms.   In January 2017, President Xi Jinping of the People’s Republic of China gave a keynote speech at the Palais des Nations of the United Nations in Geneva. Although world leaders regularly give addresses there, few other occasions have seen the UN impose restrictions such as those instituted on this occasion: before Xi’s arrival, UN officials closed parking lots and meeting rooms, and sent home early many of the office’s approximately 3,000 staff. The UN also barred nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) from attending the speech.   Just a few months later, in April, security officials at the UN headquarters in New York City ejected from the premises, Dolkun Isa, an ethnic Uyghur rights activist originally from China. Isa, who was accredited as an NGO participant, was attending a forum on indigenous issues when UN security confronted him and ordered him out of the building. No explanation was provided. Human Rights Watch queries to the UN spokesperson’s office elicited no substantive information about the incident.   The UN’s handling of these situations points to larger concerns about the treatment and protection of human rights activists critical of China as they seek to participate in UN human rights mechanisms—intended to protect the rights of all—and about China’s attempts to thwart UN scrutiny of its own human rights record.   As a UN member state and party to several international human rights treaties, China engages with the UN human rights system. It is a member of the Human Rights Council (the “Council”), participates in reviews of its treaty compliance, allows some UN independent human rights experts to visit China, and joins in assessments of its human rights record and those of other countries as part of the Council’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR) process.   Even as it engages with UN human rights institutions, however, China has worked consistently and often aggressively to silence criticism of its human rights record before UN bodies and has taken actions aimed at weakening some of the central mechanisms available in those institutions to advance rights. Because of China’s growing international influence, the stakes of such interventions go beyond how China’s own human rights record is addressed at the UN and pose a longer-term challenge to the integrity of the system as a whole.   Chinese officials have harassed activists, primarily those from China, by photographing and filming them on UN premises in violation of UN rules, and restricting their travel to Geneva. China has used its membership on the Economic and Social Council’s (ECOSOC) NGO Committee to block NGOs critical of China from being granted UN accreditation, and it has sought to blacklist accredited activists to bar their attendance. Behind the scenes, Chinese diplomats, in violation of UN rules, have contacted UN staff and experts on treaty bodies and special procedures (independent experts focusing on specific human rights issues), including behavior that at times has amounted to harassment and intimidation.   In a particularly egregious case in 2013, authorities in China detained activist Cao Shunli after she urged the Chinese government to consult with civil society in drafting China’s second Universal Periodic Review, and tried to travel to Geneva to participate in trainings on the Human Rights Council. After Cao became gravely ill in detention and died, the Chinese delegation in Geneva in March 2014 blocked a moment of silence called for by NGOs at the Council.   China has also repeatedly sought to block or weaken UN resolutions on civil society, human rights defenders, and peaceful protests, including when they do not directly concern policy and practice in China. And it has pushed back against efforts to strengthen some of the key mechanisms available at the UN to advance human rights, notably country-specific resolutions on grave situations like North Korea and Syria, and efforts to strengthen treaty body reviews.   Many of these actions are directly at cross-purposes with UN efforts to improve its human rights system, such as strengthening the treaty bodies and better protecting activists from reprisals for their UN activities. China’s opposition to a larger civil society role is also at odds with the position of Secretary-General António Guterres, who in Geneva in February 2017 stated: “The Council''s growing engagement with civil society strengthens so much of your work – and is especially vital at a time when civil society space is shrinking in so many places.”   While UN officials have at times pushed back against improper Chinese pressure or steadfastly ignored it, in other instances, they have capitulated, as illustrated by the Dolkun Isa case, or have soft-pedaled their concerns, presumably to avoid confrontation with China.   China is not alone in playing a negative human rights role at the UN but, as with all other countries, it should be expected to cooperate and constructively engage with UN institutions. When its actions are in bad faith, it should publicly be held to account.   This report documents interventions by China at the UN that hinder UN efforts to improve human rights in China and around the world. In that sense, it is a case study of how a powerful member state works within the UN system to undermine its ability to strengthen global compliance with international human rights norms.   It also examines UN responses to date, offering detailed recommendations on what UN officials and institutions can do to better protect civil society participation at the UN and safeguard the integrity of the UN human rights system.   The United Nations plays a crucial role in holding governments to their international human rights obligations and helping to protect human rights. Central elements of this work include fact-finding and investigative visits by UN experts, deliberations in the Human Rights Council, and review of state compliance with human rights treaties.   Recent Chinese efforts to spearhead UN initiatives, such as presidential statements and resolutions at the Human Rights Council, foreshadow a more active, prominent role for China in the future. Coming at a time when the domestic human rights situation in China has been rapidly deteriorating, a more active Chinese role at the Council gives rise to concern about the ways it will exercise its power.   Taken individually, many of China’s actions against NGOs might be viewed as an annoyance or an irritant. But taken together, they amount to what appears to be a systematic attempt to subvert the ability of the UN human rights system to confront abuses in China and beyond.   Indeed, there is reason to fear that China will push through initiatives that reflect not merely its own domestic sensitivities but that rollback rights protections more broadly. One small example is its refusal to include language affirming the vital role of civil society in a 2015 Council resolution on public health.   The dangers to human rights posed by an assertive China at the UN are likely to increase as the rights situation in China under President Xi worsens. Human rights defenders in China have decreasing space safe from intimidation, harassment, arbitrary detention, and a Communist Party-controlled legal system. And China has not ratified critical optional protocols to treaties that seek to ensure wider protection for the rights of individuals. This in turn underscores the importance of guarding the UN as a place where civil society activists from China can safely engage the UN system.   As a powerful Permanent Five member of the UN Security Council, China has particular weight on the Human Rights Council. It has played an influential role, together with other members of the self-proclaimed “Like-Minded Group”—many of whom have poor human rights records—in opposing all country-specific resolutions to address the most serious human rights situations, except those critical of Israel, and in attempting to weaken the UN mechanisms themselves.   China’s efforts to subvert the UN human rights system also need to be scrutinized because they have been adopted by other countries. China should not become a model for others that hope to hobble or obstruct UN human rights bodies.   Unless the UN and concerned governments can halt such efforts to manipulate or weaken UN human rights mechanisms, the UN’s ability to help protect rights around the globe is at risk not only in Geneva. The fate of the human rights mechanisms will be felt throughout the UN system more generally with respect to human rights issues before the Security Council or General Assembly, or with specialized agencies such as the UN High Commissioner for Refugees or the UN Development Program.   During UN peacekeeping budget consultations this year, for example, China sought to slash funding for UN human rights officers stationed in UN missions. These human rights officers play a vital role in monitoring, investigating, and reporting on alleged human rights abuses in the world’s most dangerous places.   The UN is facing challenges from powerful governments; ensuring that the human rights mechanisms remain robust is more important than ever.   To that end, Human Rights Watch urges the following:   The Chinese government should end its campaign of harassment against NGOs, including by allowing them to freely interact with UN mechanisms without fear of reprisals;   The United Nations, the Human Rights Council, and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights should bolster protection of NGOs and civil society activists, ensure all cases of state reprisals are investigated and addressed, and encourage competitive elections to the Human Rights Council;   The Economic and Social Council should reform the Committee on NGOs, providing clear guidance that NGO applications are to be assessed objectively on the criteria set out in ECOSOC resolution 1996/31; and The treaty bodies and special procedures should promptly report to the relevant UN body any attempts at political interference by member state delegates or their agents.   * Detailed recommendations are set forth at the end of this report, see link below: http://www.hrw.org/report/2017/09/05/costs-international-advocacy/chinas-interference-united-nations-human-rights http://www.thenation.com/article/donald-trump-and-nikki-haley-take-aim-at-the-un-human-rights-council/ http://www.passblue.com/2018/01/07/leave-the-uns-human-rights-treaty-system-alone/ Visit the related web page
	View more stories