View previous stories
	Shutting down community voices will weaken Government’s ability to make effective reforms by HRLC, ACOSS Australia   22 Dec 2014   Shutting down community voices will weaken Government’s ability to make effective reforms reports Dr Cassandra Goldie.   The Australian Council of Social Service today expressed deep concern at the extensive funding cuts to community sector organisations announced yesterday, including to policy and advocacy work. ACOSS believes this will severely weaken the Federal Government’s ability to engage with the community on the important reforms that lie ahead and deliver an inclusive growth agenda.   “Cutting support for vital community expertise and voices is a major mistake. Community voices play a crucial role in providing on-the-ground advice and an important link connecting communities with government decision-making processes,” said ACOSS CEO Dr Cassandra Goldie.   “Peak bodies working in housing and homelessness and disability, among other areas, have all been advised they will not be receiving Government funding for their work in the future, despite the core areas of need and policy priority that they represent.   “Treasurer Joe Hockey has declared that 2015 will be a year of community consultation, yet the government is dismantling the very mechanisms that will allow that to happen effectively.   “It is shocking that the Government would wait until the eve of Christmas to deliver this news, at the very time many community organisations are the most stretched with demands for help.   "We know that 80% of frontline agencies are struggling to meet growing demand for services with 2.5 million people now living below the poverty line. Most of them have been living in a state of uncertainty since the budget decision to withdraw around a quarter of a billion dollars from the Department of Social Services portfolio. Now we are finding out that the very groups that advocate for those services, and the people living in poverty and disadvantage that they represent, will be shut down in the new year.   “This is a major blow to a sector that makes an enormous contribution to our society, not only in providing a lifeline for people and communities in need, but evidence and policy advice to government.   “A strong, independent civil society is essential to a functioning democracy. Defunding these expert voices clearly diminishes our capacity to represent and advocate for the people that we are here to assist. Governments need fearless and frank advice, now arguably more than ever. Business needs community expertise to help us search for common ground on what works. The Australian public needs informed, and sometimes robust public debate. Community organisations are essential to each of these processes.   “The Prime Minister has identified the Cabinet Reshuffle as an opportunity to reset and refocus. We call on the incoming Minister for Social Services, the Hon. Scott Morrison, to reset this decision on funding cuts, recognising that these expert voices in the community sector will be of unique value to his role, bringing independent community views about practical, workable solutions to some of our biggest national challenges.   “The Government has been criticised for being unable to gain public support for many of its unfair budget measures which overwhelmingly impact upon people on the lowest incomes. Now is the time for the Government to listen to these concerns and bring the community together in forging a reform path which is fair and sustainable.   “We urge the Minister to work in partnership with us to enable everyone to participate in our society and have a strong social protection system for anyone who falls into hard times. This is the mark of a strong civil society and will be the measure by which the Government will be judged,” Dr Goldie said.   http://www.acoss.org.au   17 October 2014   Safeguarding our democracy by standing with civil society, by Hugh de Kretser.   When people are free to speak their minds and hold their leaders accountable, governments are more responsive and more effective…If you want strong, successful countries, you need strong, vibrant civil societies: President Obama, remarks at the Clinton Global Initiative 23 September 2014, New York.   Across the globe, civil society advocacy is increasingly being threatened by laws and practices that criminalise protest, prevent association, threaten funding and curtail independence. While the most extreme conduct is occurring in nations like Russia, China and Egypt, the trend isn’t limited to repressive states or transitioning democracies.   In September, Hungarian authorities raided the offices and staff homes of an NGO that distributes Norwegian aid money against the backdrop of government claims of foreign political interference. In Canada, there are fears of politically motivated audits of environmental NGOs, and late last year, the Spanish Government sought to introduce anti-protest laws creating massive fines for minor offences.   Here in Australia, the past two years have seen a range of federal and state laws, policies and statements that signal a clear undemocratic trend towards stifling criticism and protest and restricting NGO advocacy.   Anti-protest laws have been introduced or passed in Queensland, Victoria and Tasmania. The NSW and federal Governments cut funding to Environment Defenders Offices after a campaign by the Minerals Council. Other community legal centres and Aboriginal legal services have had funding cut for law reform and policy advocacy. In 2012, the Queensland Government imposed gag clauses on NGOs.   In this environment, many government-funded NGOs are avoiding or watering down criticism of governments for fear of having their funding cut in retribution (highlighting the importance of non-government funding for organisations like ours).   Globally, the fight back is happening. Initiatives like the Community of Democracies, the Open Government Partnership, resolutions from UN Human Rights Council and the establishment and work of the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of peaceful assembly and association, are all seeking to reverse this trend.   Organisations like the Human Rights Law Centre across the globe are fighting for the core human rights that are vital to enable civil society and democracy to operate; freedom of speech, freedoms of assembly and association and voting rights.   In September, I was invited to join 28 other civil society leaders from around the world in a two week US Government “Standing with civil society” program that explored the importance of civil society freedom and that built the capacity of the participants to advance it. The program culminated in addresses by President Obama at the Clinton Global Initiative and the Open Government Partnership in New York.   President Obama recognised that criticism by NGOs can make governments uncomfortable but noted that “open and honest collaboration with citizens and civil society over the long term – no matter how uncomfortable it is – makes countries stronger and it makes countries more successful, and it creates more prosperous economies, and more just societies, and more opportunity for citizens”.   As I write this, my colleague Anna Brown, along with 16 other human rights advocates, is attending a workshop in Kenya on litigating rights to peaceful assembly and association with Maina Kiai, the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of peaceful assembly and association.   This global experience puts Australia’s democratic success in context. Australia has strong and stable democratic institutions and practices and a strong and vibrant civil society. But we can’t take our success for granted. The struggle for basic democratic rights in other nations reinforces not only the importance of what we have and its universality, but also the vital need to resist attempts to wind back what we have achieved over many years.   http://hrlc.org.au/safeguarding-our-democracy-by-standing-with-civil-society/ Visit the related web page
	Tackling manifestations of collective hatred by Heiner Bielefeldt UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion   April 2014   “Manifestations of collective hatred poison the relationship among communities, threaten individuals and groups and are a source of innumerable human rights violations perpetrated by State agencies and/or non-State actors,” the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion, Heiner Bielefeldt, recently told the Human Rights Council in Geneva, where he presented his latest report.   “Hate-filled sentiments are often caused by a peculiar combination of fear and contempt which can trigger a vicious circle of mistrust, narrow-mindedness, collective hysteria, contempt-filled rumours and fear of imaginary conspiracies,” Bielefeldt said.   The report also highlights aggravating political factors that reinforce the scapegoating of religious groups, such as an authoritarian political atmosphere which impedes public debate and creates a “mentality of suspicion”; and the instrumentalization of religion by politicians to promote a concept of national identity that leads to the marginalization of religious minorities. Bielefeldt also highlighted corruption as a cause for manifestations of collective hatred because it undermines trust in public institutions and creates inward-looking mentalities.   The Rapporteur noted that tackling manifestations of collective hatred had become a pressing issue for the international community. The Rabat Plan of Action resulting from a series of regional expert workshops organized by the UN Human Rights Office in all regions of the world, provides a roadmap for States and other actors in their quest to prohibit the advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that incites to discrimination, hostility and violence.   The Rabat Plan of Action establishes a high threshold for limitations on freedom of expression - as set out in article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights - that takes into account the speaker, the intent and the likelihood of harm, among other criteria. The Plan of action was designed to help legislators draw a line between free speech and speech that can be identified as incitement to hatred.   “What we require to prevent and respond to incidents of incitement to hatred are policies which promote a creative and productive use of freedom of expression,” Bielefeldt said. “For instance, in order to challenge advocates of religious hatred when they claim to speak in the name of “the silent majority”, it is important that the majority does not remain silent.”   He also stressed that State policies devised to counter hatred should focus on building trust and respecting human dignity.   “By ensuring respect for all human beings as holders of profound, identity-shaping convictions, freedom of religion or belief plays a pivotal role in anti-hatred-policies, both in trust-building through public institutions, as well as in trust-building through communication,” he added.   Trust-building activities should include establishing trustworthy public institutions and promoting meaningful communication among different religious or belief communities. The Rapporteur highlighted his first-hand experience of positive inter- and intra-religious communication in Sierra Leone where the Interreligious Council was a key factor in efforts to reunite a country that had been torn by civil war.   “I found the open and amicable climate of interreligious cooperation in Sierra Leone- which not only includes Muslims and Christians, but also intra-religious groups, such as Sunnis, Ahamdis, Shias, Catholics, Anglicans and Evangelicals- quite remarkable,” he said.   “Likewise Jordan which provides a safe haven for religious pluralism in a region marked by increasing religious and sectarians tensions.” Visit the related web page
	View more stories