Peace for the World

Peace for the World
First democratic leader of Justice the Godfather of the Sri Lankan Tamil Struggle: Honourable Samuel James Veluppillai Chelvanayakam

Friday, September 28, 2018

Brazil’s Closed-Door Policy

A showdown between Brasília and the rural state of Roraima could seal the country to refugees from Venezuela.

Venezuelan refugees rest on a roadside in Pacaraima, Brazil, on Aug. 20. (Mauro Pimentel/AFP/Getty Images)Venezuelan refugees rest on a roadside in Pacaraima, Brazil, on Aug. 20. (Mauro Pimentel/AFP/Getty Images) 

No automatic alt text available.
BY 
 | 
In late August, Brazilian President Michel Temer announced that he would be sending an unspecified number of troops to Brazil’s northernmost state of Roraima in an effort to control escalating violence against Venezuelan refugees there. In response, the local government demanded the transfer of the refugees to other Brazilian states. These moves follow an incident earlier in August when a mob of enraged Brazilians in the Roraima town of Pacaraima attacked Venezuelan refugees with sticks and stones, knocked down their tents, and burned their belongings. The riot began after a local merchant was injured in a robbery and his family blamed a group of Venezuelans for the attack.

Now, with about 3,000 soldiers in the border region, such unrest has put the mostly rural state at the center of a showdown with Brazil’s federal government and placed it in the middle of a very contentious campaign season ahead of the upcoming general election.

In recent years, as the situation in Venezuela has worsened, at least 2.3 million people have fled to escape hunger and political persecution.

Many of them—around 52,000 people between January 2017 and March 2018—have sought refuge in neighboring Brazil. And that number is growing all the time, with thousands more arriving each month. By and large, they have found themselves in Roraima, which shares a large part of Brazil’s 1,350-mile border with Venezuela.

In turn, Roraima has seen its population increase by between 5 and 10 percent over the last few years. According to Suely Campos, the state’s governor, immigrant enrollment in local public schools has increased by almost 400 percent in two years, stretching the capacity of these services to the limit. The influx has had a big effect on small cities like Pacaraima, a very poor town of just over 12,000 residents that is now home to between 1,200 and 2,000 refugees—most of whom live on the streets and in tents.

Without homes or opportunities for formal work, many of the Venezuelans in Brazil are left to beg and to look for food in the garbage. Young Venezuelan women with children to support are particularly vulnerable, and some have ended up as sex workers. Other women and men take on jobs such as cleaning car windows at traffic lights, picking up cans in the streets for recycling, or other informal work that earns them well below what they need to survive.

Violence, meanwhile, is a fact of life. According to authorities, conflicts inside and outside shelters are common, as are attacks on refugees. For example, after a fight between Brazilians and Venezuelans in March that left two dead (a Venezuelan and a Brazilian), dozens of residents in the town of Mucajaí forced immigrants out of a shelter they had been living in and then burned their belongings. In Pacaraima, groups of Brazilian vigilantes have taken to hunting down Venezuelans who, out of fear, now avoid going out into the streets at night. Hundreds of Venezuelans have even fled the cities to seek refuge among indigenous communities in more rural areas. Unfortunately, they may have carried with them measles, which could be one factor in a deadly outbreak of the disease in northern Brazil.

Against this background, it is perhaps not surprising that in February this year, the federal government declared a state of emergency in Roraima.

At that time, it sent a first wave of soldiers to the region. These officers were tasked less with preventing the entry of new arrivals than with ensuring support for those in need—a job they have carried out with some problems, if ongoing violence and economic desperation among refugees are any indication.

At the same time, the federal and state government also opened enough shelters to hold 4,600 refugees, which was a start but was in no way sufficient to house all of the refugees in the region. Acknowledging as much, the federal government also made available weekly flights to take refugees to other states, such as São Paulo. So far, more than 2,000 refugees have been sent to other Brazilian states, but the federal government’s goal is to transport 400 refugees a week.

Still facing a crisis situation and an angry public, over the last several months, Campos has repeatedly asked Brazil’s Supreme Court to close the border with Venezuela. According to her, the size of the influx makes it impossible to maintain essential public services. Stopping the flow of refugees, she says, would be a way to give the country a chance to figure out how to provide for those already in Brazil and to prepare for new arrivals in the future.

Not everyone in Brazil agrees. According to an opinion poll from Aug. 7, 45 percent of Brazilians are against shutting out refugees, while 30 percent are in favor of closing the borders. Another 25 percent said they had no opinion. However, only 14 percent of interviewees declared that they believe that refugees are a benefit to Brazil, while 43 percent believe they are not.

Among those who support Campos’s request to close borders are at least three indigenous organizations in Roraima, the Society in Defense of the United Indians of Northern Roraima, the Alliance for the Integration and Development of Indigenous Communities of Roraima, and the Association for the Development of the Taurepangs Indigenous Peoples of Roraima, which represent over 13,000 people. Pointing to reports of violence and illegal forest clearing, these organizations claim that the wave of refugees has altered the way of life of the region’s indigenous communities.

On the other side are those who, for humanitarian reasons, oppose closing the border. “People are coming because they are starving in Venezuela,” Wagner Moura, the founder of the nongovernmental organization Fraternidade Sem Fronteiras (Fraternity Without Borders), said in an interview. “I visited families in Caracas,” he told me, “and they were getting thinner—even if they had two or three people working in the family, they only had one meal a day.” For him, cutting them off could make a bad situation worse. “Speaking of closing the border is a great humanitarian absurdity. The Brazilian population does not agree, the vast majority.”

The largest Brazilian research institutes have not conducted their own polls to confirm such sentiments, but at the very least, it is clear that few approve of Campos’s handling of the crisis.
According to a survey earlier this month, 62 percent of voters will not back her in upcoming elections. Her approach to the crisis, it seems, has been seen as too weak. The first- and second-place candidates both advocate tougher measures against refugees.

Whatever her eventual fate, for now, Campos is prepared to fight her corner in a showdown with Brasília.

In April, her administration filed a civil action against the Brazilian government demanding the closure of the borders with Venezuela or the imposition of quotas for the entry of refugees. Rosa Weber, a member of Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court, proposed holding mediation between the two sides to find a solution to the crisis. In May, the first attempt to negotiate failed—the local government agreed to waive the border closure in exchange for the payment of 184 million reais ($46 million) as reimbursement for the state’s refugee-related expenses. The federal government, insisting that it had already invested large sums of money in the state, refused to pay. A new round of talks was attempted in June, with no success.

Things heated up in August, when Campos issued her own decree demanding the immediate deportation of foreigners caught committing crimes and obliging all foreigners to present a valid passport for access to basic health services. Brazil’s Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office and the Federal Public Defender swiftly filed a lawsuit against the measure with the Supreme Court. Federal Judge Helder Girão Barreto then suspended admission of Venezuelan immigrants to Brazil, and the next day, Weber reversed the move and suspended the decree. Since then, violence against migrants has become even more routine.

With general elections looming in October, the refugee situation in Roraima has now become a campaign issue as well. On the far right, leading presidential candidate Jair Bolsonaro has noted his support for the creation of refugee camps in Roraima. In March, he visited the region and declared that Brazil “already has many problems” adding that the United Nations should create refugee camps on the border with Venezuela and take responsibility for managing them. Paulo Sergio de Almeida, a U.N. official in the region, however, stated that the organization would do so only after all other options for sheltering refugees had been exhausted, which was not the case in Roraima.

Meanwhile, in a Sept. 20 debate on the Catholic television network TV Aparecida, Fernando Haddad, the leftist Workers’ Party presidential candidate who currently ranks second in the polls, failed to present a concrete proposal to solve the situation when pressed. Despite the seriousness of the situation, in other words, it doesn’t appear that the election of a new government will resolve matters. But with life in Venezuela showing no signs of improvement, Brazilians—whether they like it or not—will have to find a way to deal with incoming refugees. If they don’t, violence may well continue to increase and the prospect of the full collapse of public services will loom large.
 
Raphael Tsavkko Garcia is a journalist and Ph.D. candidate in human rights, migration, and diaspora studies in Spain.

Major quake and tsunami cause deaths in Indonesian city


A paramedic gives treatment to an earthquake survivor outside a hospital in Donggala, Indonesia Sulawesi Island, September 28, 2018. Antara Foto/HO/BNPB-Sutopo Purwo N via REUTERS

Tabita DielaGayatri Suroyo-SEPTEMBER 28, 2018

JAKARTA (Reuters) - A tsunami caused deaths when it hit a small city on the Indonesian island of Sulawesi on Friday after a major quake, collapsing buildings and cutting off power, officials said, although the exact number of casualties was not clear.

The tsunami up to 2 metres (six feet) high struck beaches as dusk fell in Palu, a sleepy but growing tourist resort, and the nearby fishing town of Donggala, closest to the epicenter of the quake 27 km away, officials said.

“The earthquake and tsunami caused several casualties ... while initial reports show that victims died in the rubble of a collapsing building,” National Disaster Mitigation Agency spokesman Sutopo Purwo Nugroho told reporters. “The number of casualties and the full impact is still being calculated.”

Sutopo said the disaster caused a power outage that cut communications in Donggala and surrounding areas. The Communications Ministry is working to repair 276 electricity base stations.

Officials said aftershocks, the communications breakdown and the power outage made it hard to coordinate rescue efforts.

More than 600,000 people live in Palu and Donggala.

“The 1.5- to two-meter tsunami has receded,” Dwikorita Karnawati, who heads Indonesia’s meteorology and geophysics agency, BMKG, told Reuters. “The situation is chaotic. People are running on the streets and buildings have collapsed. There is a ship washed ashore.”

BMKG had earlier issued a tsunami warning but lifted it within the hour.

Amateur footage shown by local TV stations, which could not immediately be authenticated by Reuters, showed waters crashing into houses along Palu’s shoreline, scattering shipping containers and flooding into a mosque in the city.

The national search and rescue agency will deploy a large ship and helicopters to aid the operation, said agency chief Muhammad Syaugi, adding he had not been able to contact his team in Palu.

The armed forces and police will also provide troops and equipment to support the emergency response, officials aid.

Oil company Pertamina said its fuel depot in Donggala had been damaged in the incident though there was no oil spill. Fuel tanks had shifted in the quake and ship loading facilities were disabled among other damage.

There were no reports of damage to producing oil and gas fields in the area, according to the energy ministry.

Palu, hit by a 6.2 magnitude quake in 2005 which killed one person, is a tourist resort at the end of a narrow bay famous for its beaches and water sports.

In 2004, an earthquake off the northern Indonesian island of Sumatra triggered a tsunami across the Indian Ocean, killing 226,000 people in 13 countries, including more than 120,000 in Indonesia.

Some people took to Twitter saying they could not contact loved ones. “My family in Palu is unreachable,” Twitter user @noyvionella said.

Palu airport was closed.

The area was hit by a lighter quake earlier in the day, which destroyed some houses, killing one person and injuring at least 10 in Donggala, authorities said.

The U.S. Geological Survey put the magnitude of the second quake at a strong 7.5, after first saying it was 7.7.

“Aftershocks are still continuing,” Nugroho said.

“Communication has been crippled at this time, causing difficulties in coordination and reporting with the region.”

Indonesia sits on the Pacific Ring of Fire and is regularly hit by earthquakes.

A series of earthquakes in July and August killed nearly 500 people on the holiday island of Lombok, hundreds of kilometres southwest of Sulawesi.

Additional reporting by Fransiska Nangoy, Fanny Potkin, Wilda Asmarini, Fergus Jensen, and Jessica Damiana; Editing by Matthew Mpoke Bigg

Limiting children's screen time linked to better cognition


Children using mobile phones

27 September 2018
Limiting children's recreational screen use has been linked with improved cognition.
Children aged eight to 11 who used screens for fun for less than two hours a day performed better in tests of mental ability, a study found.
Combining this with nine to 11 hours of sleep a night was found to be best for performance.
Researchers said more work was now needed to better understand the effects of different types of screen use.
However, they acknowledge that their observational study shows only an association between screen time and cognition and cannot prove a causal link.
And it did not look at how children were using their screen time, be it to watch television, play videogames or use social media.
The study, of 4,500 US children, published in The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health journal, used questionnaires to estimate the child's:
  • physical activity
  • sleep
  • recreational screen time
Children also completed a test, which assessed cognitive skills, including:
  • language
  • memory
  • attention
The study controlled for:
  • household income
  • parental and child education
  • ethnicity
  • pubertal development
  • body mass index (BMI)
  • traumatic brain injury
It found that children who each day had less than two hours of recreational screen time, got nine to 11 hours of sleep, and did at least one hour of physical activity performed better than who did none of these.
Less than two hours of screen time a day was the one factor most linked to better performance in the test.
Dr Jeremy Walsh, from the CHEO Research Institute, in Ottawa, Canada, said: "Based on our findings, paediatricians, parents, educators, and policymakers should promote limiting recreational screen time and prioritising healthy sleep routines throughout childhood and adolescence."
Dr Walsh added that more research was now needed into the links between screen time and cognition, including studying the effects of different types of screen time.
He said there was some evidence, for example, that video games and educational TV programmes might have cognitive benefits.
In contrast, emerging evidence suggested the use of mobile devices and social media may be harmful for attention, memory and impulse control, he said.
Children playing computer games
Researchers said it was important to look in more detail about the effects of different types of screen time
However, the authors acknowledged there were limitations to their study, including that the data was self-reported.
The questionnaires were also only used only at the beginning of the study and so did not track how behaviours may change over time.
Dr Kirsten Corder, senior investigator scientist at the University of Cambridge, who was not involved in the study, said it added to existing evidence showing potential negative links with screen time and cognitive development in children.
But she pointed out that the children may have struggled to answer the questions accurately.
Dr Corder also said further work was needed to develop more accurate ways to assess the effects of screen time in detail.
"These results will hopefully stimulate further research using techniques that allow researchers to explore how multiple behaviours may interplay to benefit cognition and health," she said.

Thursday, September 27, 2018

HR situation in Sri Lanka: Govt.’s commitment gives ray of hope

Attorney-at-law Priyalal Sirisena (Left), Herman Kumara (Centre) and Hans Fridlund, Programme Manager at UPR Info UPR Info Country Coordinator brief the media about improving the human rights situationin the country
(Pics by Waruna Wanniarachchi)  

 2018-09-28
As a country that is in the process of recovering from a 30-year ethnic conflict, many people affected by the war are yet to enjoy their basic rights such as safety, ownership of lands and settling down in permanent shelters. In a war-torn backdrop, a country has to start its forward march from scratch. The struggle to establish a framework to deliver justice to affected victims- including internally displaced persons (IDPs) and their families, victims of torture and abuse among others- was experienced by successive governments. However, under the Yahapalana regime, Sri Lanka recently expanded its commitment to Human Rights by ratifying the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Implementing the Office of Missing Persons (OMP) and several other mechanisms were quite challenging and the contribution by civil society groups is commendable. Yet, Sri Lanka as a country has a long way to go in terms of achieving 
these objectives.   
However civil society groups and human rights activists believe that the freshly drafted National Human Rights Action Plan (NHRAP) needs to be executed with immediate effect. During a recent visit, Hans Fridlund, Programme Manager at Geneva-based NGO UPR Info said that the commitments by the government in terms of improving the human rights situation were satisfactory.   


“167 Recommendations were based on ideas by civil society groups”

Speaking at a recently held press conference, UPR Info Country Coordinator Herman Kumara said that it’s important that the civil society groups get involved in implementing the human rights framework. “Back in 2012 we carried out the UPR process, but the Government of Sri Lanka didn’t get involved with the civil societies. However, we now observe that the Government has been involved in some way or the other. Sri Lanka received 230 recommendations in relation to human rights and 167 of these recommendations were based on the proposals and ideas presented by the civil society groups. But we need to check how they will be implemented in future. There are various issues in relation to human rights that haven’t been solved to date,” said Kumara.   

"The struggle to establish a framework to deliver justice to affected victims- including internally displaced persons (IDPs) and their families, victims of torture and abuse among others- was experienced by successive governments"

He further said that the civil society collective immensely contributed to the drafting of the NHRAP, but this contribution isn’t satisfactory in terms of executing this plan. “Another concern is that there are several issues with regard to the constitutional amendment process. We also raised concerns with regards to lands and people who were affected by the war. Here we noticed that the Government is ready to provide solutions for these issues with the necessary infrastructure and resources. But we also observed that these plans aren’t being implemented at the grassroots level. This is because most displaced or affected families live without basic needs. They are insecure in terms of safety, ownership of lands etc. but it was mentioned that almost 88% of lands have been released to the owners,” he added.   
According to Kumara, the Office of Missing Persons needs to commence operations with immediate effect. “In terms of torture and abuse we don’t see a shift in the attitudes of Government officials. But we appreciate the fact that the attitudes of certain officials have changed in a positive way,” he said.   


“State bears the primary responsibility of implementing the Review”

UPR Info is a non-profit, non-governmental organisation that aims to raise awareness on the Universal Periodic Review and to provide capacity building tools to all stakeholders such as UN Member states, parliamentarians, civil society groups, media and academics. In his comments, Hans Fridlund, Programme Manager at UPR Info, said that a defining feature of our engagement with partners is that we don’t seek to impose any pre-set agenda on national voices. “We are simply a facilitator and a partner, ready to support national efforts with technical expertise on the UPR.   

“In order to achieve this endeavor, we support national UPR stakeholders both before and after the review,” Fridlund continued.“Before the review we extend support to Governments in the consultation process and drafting of the National Report. After the review, we collaborate with actors to kick-start the implementation process at the domestic level through discussions between Government officials and civil society representatives and to report back to the Human Rights Council halfway between reviews.”   
Speaking on the Recommendations Hans said that one of the strengths of the Universal Periodic Review is that it covers the full set of human rights including economic, social and cultural rights as well as civil and political rights and group rights. “Implementation of UPR recommendations must be coupled with addressing recommendations coming from other United Nations Human Rights mechanisms such as the treaty body system and the Special Procedures. Recommendations from national processes and the National Human Rights Commission should also be taken into consideration as well as the state’s obligations towards the Sustainable Development Goals. In this vein, it was encouraging to see a recommendation calling for the incorporation of the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women into Sri Lanka’s domestic system, and that Recommending states seized the opportunity to make recommendations calling for the full implementation of Human Rights Council resolution 30/1 ‘Promoting reconciliation, accountability and human rights in Sri Lanka’,” he added.   

When asked about how the 167 recommendations should be implemented by the State, Hans said that the Universal Periodic Review is a state-led peer-review mechanism and as such the state bears the primary responsibility for their implementation. However civil society is a recognized actor in the follow-up process and should thus be involved in the realization of recommendations,” said Hans.   
According to Hans, in the absence of an official follow-up mechanism, voluntary mid-term reporting is a good practice to take stock of the implementation levels of all recommendations, noted and supported, halfway between reviews.   


“Slow progress in terms of implementation is a question” 

Airing his views on this review, attorney-at-law Priyalal Sirisena said that the National Human Right Action plan contains a specific chapter on Internally Displaced Persons and Returning Refugees. “It speaks of creating a policy and framework to address displacements, provision of interim facilities, release of occupied lands, compensation for IDPs and returnees, supporting their livelihood and establishment of Office for Reparations. These action plans are welcomed by the civil society. However, the implementation of these proposals requires a proactive and cooperative approach by the relevant ministries, including the Ministry of Resettlement, Ministry of Defence and the Ministry of Lands etc. Resettlement is not going to be meaningful unless proper preparations and restoration of livelihood are taken care of. The NHRAP seems to describe what needs to be done, yet the slow progress in terms of implementation is a question,” said Sirisena.   

"Civil society is a recognised actor in the follow-up process"

Although the war ended in 2009, issues relating to IDPs, war victims and victims of abuse were neglected by successive Governments. “These are matters falling under transitional justice which are happening very slowly,” Sirisena continued. “The resettlement of IDPs is a crucial issue, yet getting delayed due to political and other reasons. The government-declared 80% of the lands acquired by the military in war-time have been released to civilians, but civil society activists have pointed out that the figures were not correct.” he added.   
"Resettlement of IDPs a crucial issue"
In terms of interventions which could be carried out by the Government, Sirisena believes that fast resettlement and restoring livelihoods of the affected population is an urgent necessity. “Yet the process seems very slow,” he added. “Sri Lanka has reaffirmed its firm commitment to United Nations resolution 30/1 at the Universal Periodic Review last November. This resolution prescribes four transitional justice mechanisms to be established, of which OMP and Office of Reparations are two mechanisms. A Truth Commission and Accountability mechanism are yet to be established. In achieving justice for the affected people, accountability mechanism is a must, but it has already become a matter of much controversy. It should be noted that the Government made a voluntary pledge at the UPR session at Geneva to establish these four mechanisms including a judicial mechanism. For any transitional justice process with an ethno-political aspect, openness and bold steps by the Government are necessary to make things move forward, despite criticisms,” he concluded.

PTA CASES TO BE FAST-TRACKED

Sampanthan, PM discuss new counter-terror legislation:
TNA requests general amnesty for PTA prisoners:
 
 
Disna Mudalige-Friday, September 28, 2018

The Government has undertaken to expedite the cases of persons who had been held in custody or detention for a long time under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA).

Opposition Leader and TNA Leader R. Sampanthan met Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe at Temple Trees on Wednesday to discuss matters pertaining to the prisoners detained under the PTA and the new counter-terror legislation.

The meeting was also attended by Justice Minister Thalatha Athukorala, Attorney General Jayantha Jayasuriya and TNA MP M.A.Sumanthiran.

During the meeting that extended for about two hours, the Attorney General has agreed to come up with a mechanism within three days to expedite the remaining cases of the PTA detainees.

According to sources, the TNA had requested the Government to release the prisoners detained under the PTA without further delay. The Opposition Leader had pointed out that these detainees and their family members have suffered very long periods of time.

He had noted that the TNA political representatives had given repeated assurances to the people in their electorate that they would resolve the problem of PTA detainees through negotiation with the Government and that they could no longer make them wait.

The Government had briefed the TNA leadership about the current status of legal proceedings with regard to the PTA detainees. According to sources, the TNA had requested general amnesty for the prisoners held under the PTA and the Government members had told them to wait till President Maithripala Sirisena returns to the country to continue the discussions as the power to grant general amnesty lies with him.

Another round of discussions to reach a solution to the matter has been scheduled for next Tuesday at the Justice Ministry.

HOW CAN UN RESOLUTIONS MAKE IT SAFER TO BE A JOURNALIST?

Sri Lanka Brief27/09/2018
Since 2012, several landmark resolutions have been approved by various UN bodies on the issue of the safety of journalists. IFEX’s 5-minute guide explains what they are, and how civil society can use them to keep governments accountable.
This is one in a series of IFEX explainers aimed at strengthening the ability of civil society to engage in global spaces for free expression advocacy. To visit the hub page and see the whole set, click here.
Never has the United Nations (UN) been so focussed on the issue of journalistic safety. Since 2012, when the UN Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity was launched, several landmark resolutions have been passed. The need to protect the practice of journalism is higher than ever on the UN agenda. The challenge? Turning words on paper into reality on the ground. For civil society organisations, this starts by increasing our understanding of these resolutions, monitoring their application, and demanding government follow-through and accountability.
 “WHEN JOURNALISTS ARE TARGETED, SOCIETIES AS A WHOLE ALSO PAY THE PRICE. THE KIND OF NEWS THAT GETS SILENCED – CORRUPTION, CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, ILLEGAL TRAFFICKING – IS EXACTLY THE KIND OF INFORMATION THE PUBLIC NEEDS TO KNOW.” 
STATEMENT FROM UN SECRETARY GENERAL ANTÓNIO GUTERRES, ON 2 NOVEMBER 2017, THE DAY UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION 68/163 DESIGNATED TO BE THE INTERNATIONAL DAY TO END IMPUNITY FOR CRIMES AGAINST JOURNALISTS
What you need to know about UN resolutions for the safety of journalists
We’ve organised this explainer in five sections, followed by a timeline of key resolutions relating to journalist safety and impunity and links to additional resources:
1. What are they?
2. What are they supposed to achieve?
3. Who is involved in their development?
4. How is implementation monitored?
5. How can civil society monitor, strengthen, and use them?
But first, some acronyms that will come in handy:
HRC: United Nations Human Rights Council
OHCHR: Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
UN: United Nations
UNESCO: United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organisation
UNGA United Nations General Assembly
UNSC: United Nations Security Council
UNSG: United Nations Secretary General
UPR: Universal Periodic Review

1. What are they?

Since 2012, several resolutions on the safety of journalists have been passed by various UN bodies. Together, they provide a framework for the promotion of the safety of journalists at the global level, and, more importantly, at the national and local level. Four resolutions were passed by the UNGA, three by the HRC, one by the UNSC and another by UNESCO. Previous to 2012, only two resolutions were focused on this particular issue; one passed by UNESCO in 1997 and another, by the UNSC, in 2006. Resolutions are available in the six official UN languages: Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish.

2. What are they supposed to achieve?

UN resolutions reflect the views of the UN Member States and they provide policy recommendations. Although these are not binding, they do establish political commitments. And they have evolved, providing more concrete recommendations which can be used in advocacy efforts. HRC Resolution 32/13 affirmed that “the same rights that people have offline must also be protected online, in particular freedom of expression”. According to IFEX member ARTICLE 19, HRC Resolution 33/2 (2016) “broke new ground”, by calling on States to take action on specific issues including arbitrary detentions, encryption, digital security and gender-based attacks.

3. Who is involved in their development?

The process of drafting a resolution usually starts with an informal proposal made by one or more UN Member States, known as sponsors. Through informal engagement with other State delegations in the corresponding UN body, co-sponsors may decide to join the initiative, and a draft resolution is then officially presented for discussion at the relevant sessions of the UNGA, the HRC, the UNSC, or the UNESCO General Conference.

4. How is implementation monitored?

Monitoring the implementation of UN resolutions is a collective task. Civil society organisations can supervise governments’ progress towards implementing their commitments, and can advocate, when necessary, to ensure they follow through. Media, in their role as watchdogs, can report on whether governments are fulfilling their duties as outlined in resolutions. However, the UN system also has its own monitoring procedures. In most cases, resolutions are followed-up with a report, which is prepared by the OHCHR, on behalf of the UNSG in the case of UNGA resolutions; by the OHCHR in the case of HRC resolutions; and by the UNESCO Secretariat in the case of UNESCO resolutions. For the UNSC, information is provided in the UNSG reports on the protection of civilians.

5. How can civil society monitor, strengthen, and use them?

• Create and work with coalitions to actively engage in the development of UN resolutions by advocating and providing inputs via local governments, foreign embassies, UN delegations and informal groupings of States that are supportive on the issue of journalists’ safety, such as those recently created at the UN in New York and Geneva, and UNESCO in Paris. Early in the process, civil society groups may be able to provide inputs, ideally in a coordinated manner, by nurturing relationships with UN delegations.
• When a resolution is being informally discussed, advocate for your country to co-sponsor it, particularly if it has not done so in the past. This will strengthen requests for government accountability. The majority of UN human rights resolutions are adopted by consensus. However, even then, States are invited to “cosponsor” the resolution, as a way of showing their heightened support for the commitments it contains. The more cosponsoring States a resolution receives, the more it demonstrates that it is a global priority.
• Make the resolution’s commitments widely available; raise awareness about its recommendations among civil society groups in your country as well as at the regional level, among media outlets, and with society at large. (A tip: Hyperlinks to UN resolutions can be created by adding the number of the resolution to the address undocs.org. For example: HRC resolution 33/2 would be http://undocs.org/A/HRC/RES/33/2)
• Monitor its implementation at the national level, and advocate for governments to improve on their achievements. For example, you can send letters to your foreign ministry asking what measures have been taken to implement commitments expressed in resolutions – there is usually a person or department responsible for intergovernmental organisations – and/or to your country representation in the appropriate delegation to the UN in New York, Geneva or Paris (emails can be found on the websites of these UN bodies). To reinforce these actions, call for meetings with government representatives at the foreign ministry to discuss the resolution’s implementation. In this process, you will find it useful to check whether your country has sponsored or co-sponsored any of the resolutions; the information is available at this link for the UNGA, and in the draft resolutions in the cases of HRC and UNESCO resolutions. For the resolutions mentioned in the timeline above, you can find the list of government co-sponsors at the end of this piece.
• Share the results of your monitoring and follow-up activities with other civil society groups, and join efforts to strengthen the resolution’s implementation.
• Use any concrete recommendations in the resolutions to support specific advocacy actions and campaigns for the safety of journalists in your country or region.
• Promote the use of recommendations in judicial processes and litigation.
• Contribute to implementation reports. Calls for contributions are made in advance by the OHCHR. Get updates by subscribing to the civil society newsletter here.
• Advocate for the resolution’s recommendations to be taken into account and used by other UN processes and mechanisms, such as the Universal Periodic Review (UPR), the special mechanisms, and the treaty body recommendation.
• Help to inform the community on the debates about resolutions. You can follow sessions in person and, for the UNGA and the HRC, via webcasts. You can also tweet about them and write articles. This is important, as you can share each country’s positions and to what extent they are supporting the issue of the safety of journalists.

A timeline of key resolutions relating to journalist safety and impunity

Each resolution has managed to advance the issue of journalist safety and impunity in incremental but essential ways, as illustrated in the timeline below.
NOVEMBER 1997
UNESCO Resolution 29 on condemnation of violence against journalists
For the first time, the UNESCO General Conference requests that the Director General of UNESCO condemn the killing of journalists and “any other physical violence” against them, and puts in place a monitoring system by which UNESCO’s Director General makes a statement every time a journalist is killed. Beginning in 2008, the Director General produces a biennial report on the killing of journalists and the progress of judicial inquiries. It is entitled “The Safety of Journalists and the Danger of Impunity”.
See more
DECEMBER 2006
UNSC Resolution 1738
This first ever resolution on this theme by the UNSC condemns attacks against journalists in situations of armed conflict and recalls that “journalists, media professionals and associated personnel” shall be considered civilians, and that these individuals and their media equipment cannot be considered legitimate targets. It requests that the UN Secretary General include a follow-up sub-item on the safety of journalists in his annual reports on the protection of civilians in armed conflict submitted to the UNSC.
See more
SEPTEMBER 2012
HRC Resolution 21/12 on the safety of journalists
The first HRC resolution on the safety of journalists calls upon States to promote a safe and enabling environment for them, including through legislative measures, awareness-raising, monitoring and reporting, and dedicating necessary resources to investigate and prosecute attacks against them. It also encourages States to create protection programmes and invites further cooperation on the UN Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity. In 2013, a report on good practices put in place by States to promote the safety of journalists was prepared by the OHCHR as a follow-up.
See more
DECEMBER 2013
UNGA Resolution 68/163 on the safety of journalists and the issue of impunity
The first resolution on the safety of journalists and the issue of impunity, specifically, proclaims 2 November as the International Day to End Impunity for Crimes against Journalists. It urges Member States to conduct impartial, speedy, and effective investigations, and to bring the perpetrators of such crimes to justice. Moreover, it invites UN bodies to create focal points for the implementation of the UN Plan of Action (in 2017, the UN Secretary General named a focal point on journalists’ safety on his team to follow the issue more closely, and requested that UN bodies do the same). Follow-up reports are always published by the UNSG. The one for this resolution can be read here.
See more
SEPTEMBER 2014
HRC Resolution 27/5 on the safety of journalists
This resolution provides more concrete recommendations for combating impunity for attacks and violence against journalists, such as creating special investigative units or independent commissions, adopting specific protocols and methods of investigation and prosecution, training prosecutors and the judiciary, and establishing information-gathering, early warning and rapid response mechanisms. It also stresses the need for strategic cooperation among UN bodies and mechanisms, as well as the importance of addressing the issue of the safety of journalists in countries’ Universal Periodic Reviews (UPR). No implementation report was published.
See more
DECEMBER 2014
UNGA Resolution 69/185 on the safety of journalists and the issue of impunity
All attacks and violence against journalists are unequivocally condemned in this resolution, which for the first time specifically includes torture, extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, arbitrary arrest and arbitrary detention, as well as intimidation and harassment. As in 2013, it urges States to do their utmost to prevent violence, threats and attacks, also by publicly and systematically condemning violence and attacks against journalists. A UNSG report to monitor its implementation was published in 2015.
See more
DECEMBER 2015
UNSC Resolution 2222
In this resolution, all parties involved in armed conflict are urged to respect the professional independence and rights of journalists and media professionals, and to take steps to ensure accountability for crimes committed against journalists working in these situations. The resolution also affirms that UN peacekeeping operations should report on specific acts of violence against journalists in situations of armed conflict.
See more
DECEMBER 2015
UNGA Resolution 70/162 on the safety of journalists and the issue of impunity
This resolution includes a call upon States to ensure measures to combat terrorism and preserve national security, in compliance with international standards and without arbitrarily hindering the work and safety of journalists. The UNSG report on the implementation of this resolution was focused on the issue of violence against women.
See more
SEPTEMBER 2016
HRC Resolution 33/2 on the safety of journalists
Resolution 33/2 goes further than its predecessors, calling for more effective implementation of States’ obligations, including through enforcement mechanisms to strengthen the safety of journalists at the country level. It also urges the immediate and unconditional release of journalists and media workers who have been arbitrarily arrested or detained, taken hostage, or who have become victims of enforced disappearances, and to pay special attention to the safety of journalists during election periods. It emphasizes the need for encryption and anonymity tools for journalists as well as the protection of journalistic sources. Moreover, for the first time, a resolution on the safety of journalists not only “acknowledges”, but specifically condemns attacks against women journalists. The implementation report, this time focused on the effectiveness of UN mechanisms on the promotion of the safety of journalists, will be published in 2018.
See more
NOVEMBER 2017
UNESCO Resolution on the safety of journalists
This resolution encourages States to establish national safety mechanisms within the framework of the UN Plan of Action on journalists’ safety, to monitor indicator 16.10.1 (the number of verified cases of killing, kidnapping, enforced disappearance, arbitrary detention and torture of journalists, associated media personnel, trade unionists and human rights advocates in the previous 12 months) in the context of the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, and to pay special attention to specific threats to the safety of women journalists.
See more
DECEMBER 2017
UNGA Resolution 72/175
This fourth resolution by the UN General Assembly has a strong focus on gender-based violence. It also reiterates States’ commitments to protecting digital security and ceasing internet shutdowns, and asks for reform of abusive laws – particularly those related to national security and counter-terrorism – to ensure the do not undermine the right to freedom of expression. This text was sponsored by Greece, Argentina, Austria, Costa Rica, France, and Tunisia.
(IFEX)