Human Rights Work: Actors & Mechanism
Whom do States Deal with When
It Comes to Human Rights?
There is a wide array of institutions and countries across the
globe abuzz with thousands upon thousands of institutions and organizations
in all disciplines, but to a give a synopsis of this world we can
name the key players:
1- United Nations (UN) organs namely the Office of High Commissioner
for Human Rights (OHCHR), UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) and UN
agencies such as the International Labor Organization (ILO), United
Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO),
United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), World Health Organization
(WHO) among others. All these institutions play a role with certain
aspects of human rights that should not be overlooked or understated.
2- International human rights Non-governmental organizations
(NGO’s) which operate internationally such as Amnesty/Human Rights
Watch (HRW)/ Human Rights First (HRF)/ International Federation
for Human Rights (IFHR)/ Article 19 / World Organization Against
Torture (OMCT) / Human Rights Defenders, etc.
3- Some states and particularly in the Western world which tend
to apply its own model and vision through the application of human
rights and democracy standards. These countries have a strong impact
on the UN and international media and acquire the ability to impose
sanctions on countries and to politically exploit the human rights
blunders of their foes. It also have an influence on UN agencies,
international NGO’s and even local ones in some countries from a
funding, education and training perspective. These countries also
have special monitoring mechanisms of human rights conditions in
every country. Furthermore, the Ministries of foreign affairs in
some of these states publish quarterly or annual reports on human
rights which have now become a focal part of their foreign policies.
It must be noted that these states are also subject to domestic
pressure from human rights organizations, parliament, media or even
rival parties to adopt certain stances regarding a specific country
or a particular human rights issue which means it has an impact
on these human rights institutions.
These states do not work in a secluded world as they put pressure
or are subjected to it whether it is related to their own human
rights record or that of others including its allies.
4- Let us take local and regional human rights organizations
such as the Arab Human Rights organization and the Cairo Institute
for Human Rights (CIHR) and human rights groups across the world.
All these groups have some sort of a link to the UN, states and
international human rights organizations. They are therefore partners
in the international human rights system and cannot be separated
from it or underestimated or viewed as a tool in the hands of other
countries.
5- There are also the local and regional professional organizations,
particularly the international ones such as the International Bar
Association (IBA), International Federation of Trade Unions (IFTU),
Federation of International Physicians, Reporters Without Borders
and Transparency International (TI). All these entities are concerned
with what is going on in Bahrain and other countries. They are monitoring,
following up on complaints, putting pressure, calling for reforms,
contacting the media, pressing states, issuing reports and communicating
with stakeholders in all countries whether they are NGO’s, government,
activists or human rights defenders.
The Path and Mechanisms of Human Rights Issues:
Human rights organizations represent a link in a chain of pressure
that may begin with one person somewhere in the world whose work
ripples through to the highest level of international attention.
a- A case could start with an incident of human rights violation
that is picked up by a local human rights activist who demands an
investigation into it and a halting of the abuse. Soon enough, this
becomes news and is transmitted to local and international human
rights organizations with an interest in this case.
b- Domestically, people are mobilized against this incident and
depending on its gravity, demonstrations or other forms of objections,
whether legal or popular, might erupt on the ground. Based on the
official response, the reaction could either be stepped up or subdued.
c- On the home front as well, the incident could be handled through
the legal mechanisms taking it to a certain path which would be
dealt with by lawyers, whereas some political forces could, simultaneously,
seek to exploit the situation and launch a criticism campaign against
the authorities, promoted through popular and electronic media outlets.
If the authorities do not move to explain the circumstances surrounding
the violation or clarify their position or modify their behavior
or initiate an investigation and choose, instead, to maintain silence,
things could deteriorate and eventually snowball out of control.
This could also occur if the official explanation provided is deemed
insufficient and unconvincing to the domestic and international
public opinion.
d- On the other side, regional and international human rights
organizations pick up the news and spread it until it become headlines
regionally and internationally. As for the international human rights
organizations, if the incident was a minor one, it is recorded and
retained to be included in their annual reports or annexed to other
violations that may appear in separate press releases. However,
if the violation is a major one, then it requires undertaking certain
steps which start by contacting the authorities in the country in
question. Many countries tend to provide timely responses to these
groups explaining their positions and addressing the issue if it
was deemed authentic. In these situations those human rights organizations
would be satisfied and the matter would end there. When it comes
to a country that typically delays its responses or not responds
at all, the pursuing international organizations would send it a
direct message and await the response, which more often than not
either comes too late or does not come at all. Subsequently, condemning
statements are issued by these groups relying on information they
have received on the case, treating it as credible, even if it was
one sided, and subsequently base their positions on it.
e- In some cases when the abuse is of a greater magnitude and
therefore waiting for days is not an option such as in cases that
involve the detention of prominent figures or the death of people
under torture, the international organizations swiftly issue an
‘Urgent Action’ memo while continuing to investigate and sending
messages to the relevant authorities.
f- These kinds of ‘Urgent Action’ memos entail the mobilization
of all human rights supporters worldwide against the violation and
the perpetrating state. Thousands of these people would move all
at once in various directions; writing directly to the relevant
authorities or to their embassies abroad, contacting the media in
their countries to bring attention to the incident, petitioning
their own government or parliament, organizing rallies in front
of embassies and holding seminars. The United Nations and other
human rights organizations are also contacted to support the same
cause and adopt the same position. This ‘Urgent Action’ memo could
be repeated depending on the developments in the case and would
subsequently reaches governments in international forums and be
raised during visits by foreign officials to the concerned state.
As a result, the issue could stay alive for years.
g- The campaign in these cases of violations could even go further.
After the international public opinion is saturated with news of
abuses and after the image of the concerned state is tarnished,
it would then be politically cornered through meetings of the UNHRC
or during the comprehensive periodic review. There may also be attempts
to adopt resolutions or issue joint statements. Then these organizations
would call for the curtailment of political, economic or strategic
cooperation with the offending state. There might also be a push
for punishing the state and besieging it politically and in the
media and things may even go as far as justifying a military campaign
(Syria, Iraq) or a diplomatic embargo and other restrictions (North
Korea / Venezuela / Iran / Cuba / Russia).
The realization of this process in human rights work should compel
countries not to carry out any violations, address legal loopholes
and quickly resolve the cases of violations so they do not spiral
out of control thus leaving a significant impact that would develop
negatively on the international arena.
|