Transition to Universalism/Relativism Debate: Localizing Human Rights ER 11, Gov E-1040 Spring 2012.

Transition to Universalism/Relativism Debate:

Localizing Human Rights

ER 11, Gov E-1040Spring 2012

Deepening and broadening of human rights concerns over

time

Main message: over time impact on multiple levels

• Major (binding) human rights treaties plus multiple others • Impact on constitutions and domestic laws• Regional human rights regimes • UN bureaucracy (High Commissioner, Assistant Secretary-General in New

York, Special Rapporteurs, etc.) • Impact on domestic resistance (Charter 77, Moscow Helsinki Group) • Joining forces with anti-colonial efforts (decolonization, self-

determination) • Increasing role of NGOs – very name was born in connection to

“consultative status” with the UN• Grant-making institutions (like the Ford Foundation, Rockefeller

Foundation, Soros/Open Society Foundation)

UN Human Rights OrganizationsOverview

(Since 2006: Human Rights Council)

Vernacularization

• Question: how are human rights “translated” to engage with local customs, to make sure they make a difference locally?

• vernacularization (Sally Merry)

• much of work of human rights organizations involved with this process

• as are many human rights internships open to students

Vernacularization

• often, “travel” involved is from global North to South

• crucial because UN treaty bodies have no serious enforcement power

• do little more than blame, name, and shame, stimulate, supervise, recommend, etc.

Concerns about cultural imperialism about human rights are mitigated to the extent that

we are observing many processes of vernacularization

Six core human rights treaties

• The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, adopted in 1966 and which entered into force in 1976

• The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, adopted in 1966, entered into force in 1976

• The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (1965, 1969)

• The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (1979, 1981)

• The Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1984, 1987)

• The Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989, 1990)

Case Study: Women’s Rights

• Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW)

• Adopted 1979, came into effect 1981

• Also, four large international conferences on women’s rights, most recently in Beijing 1995

Ratification situation

For example, Article 161. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate

discrimination against women in all matters relating to marriage and family relations and in particular shall ensure, on a basis of equality of men and women:

(a) The same right to enter into marriage; […[ (c) The same rights and responsibilities during marriage and at its dissolution; […] (h) The same rights for both spouses in respect of the ownership, acquisition,

management, administration, enjoyment and disposition of property (…).

Treaty Body: Committee on Elimination of Discrimination against Women

• independent experts monitoring implementation

• parties obliged to submit reports on how rights are implemented

How does the existence of treaty have an impact?

Female Inheritance Movement

Female Inheritance Movement

Background

• 1899: Britain leases New Territories from China, promising to respect customary law

• Including law of male-only inheritance

• 90s: general concerns in HK in light of pending hand-over to China in 1997

Lai-Sheung Cheng• father died without will; brothers inherited house and sold it

(1991)

• refused to leave without share of proceeds, citing ancient custom granting a right to stay in family home to unmarried women after father’s death

• new owner massively harassed her

• decided to make this public: contacted governor, press

Linda Wong

• Social worker at Hong Kong Federation of Women’s Centers

• Contact made through newspaper

• Knew other women were in similar situation; organized meeting

Hong Kong Council of Women• Had prepared shadow report in conjunction with report to

Human Rights Committee (which monitored compliance with ICCPR), 1991

• report had already framed female inheritance issue in terms of human rights

• authors were four Western women with academic backgrounds

• provided intellectual framework for activists and legislators -- made it impossible for government to plead ignorance

Legal Crisis

• realized that New Territories legislation applied to all people living there – excluding women generally from inheritance

• created legal crises: amendment was needed, led to a public discussion

Anti-Discrimination Female Indigenous Residents Committee

• Originally, women affected by inheritance rule did not frame claims in terms of rights, but in terms of compassion

• did not work, so eventually this committee was founded

• Included Wong; Cheng was chair - had access to “rights thinking” happening in the background

Hearings

• Organized individual testimonies to the relevant legal bodies, to media

• Made testimonies effective

• often women who did not know relevant terms before, and needed directions to find downtown hearings

Opponents: The Heung Yee Kuk

• organization of rural male leaders

• saw themselves as defenders of tradition, culture

• worries about clan property being owned by outsiders

• Wildly overreacted and thus lost sympathies (threatening to rape activists, etc.)

Anna Wu and Christine Loh

• Members of the legislature • Educated, Wu a lawyer

• Took up concerns, connected them to human rights/international law, especially CEDAW

Success

• 1994 – inheritance law was amended

• Indigenous women had no further-reaching interests in activism

• Different women’s groups involved did not see each other much, had different backgrounds, literally spoke different languages

Another example: Tostan

• Goes back to activities of American exchange student (Molly Melching); community empowerment

• mission is to empower African communities to bring about sustainable development and positive social transformation based on human rights

Tostan means ‘breakthrough’ in West African language of Wolof

• Since 1991, Tostan has brought 30-month education program to thousands of communities in ten African countries: Burkina Faso, Djibouti, The Gambia, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Mali, Mauritania, Senegal, Somalia, and Sudan

From Tostan’s website “In 1997, a group of women from the Senegalese village of

Malicounda Bambara stood before 20 journalists and declared their decision to end the practice of Female Genital Cutting (FGC), a centuries-old tradition in their village. The women had participated in Tostan's basic education program, and the knowledge they had gained in classes on human rights and health led them to make this momentous decision. Since 1997, 3,307 villages in Senegal, 298 in Guinea, and 23 in Burkina Faso, as well as villages from three other African countries, have joined the women of Malicounda Bambara in abandoning this harmful practice.”

Why does it work? “Tostan takes a respectful approach that allows villagers to

make their own conclusions about FGC and to lead their own movements for change. In the modules on human rights, participants learn about their human rights to health and to be free from all forms of violence, and they discuss the responsibilities they share to protect these rights in their community. In sessions on health, they learn about the potential immediate and long-term harmful consequences of the practice and discuss ways to prevent these health problems in the future. Thus, rather than blaming or criticizing, the Tostan program places villagers in charge of decisions regarding the practice. However, ending FGC is not a requirement for communities to participate in the education program.”

Point is:

• FGC has advantages only via social expectations and compliance

• If social expectations are modified and compliance terminated, there are no more advantages

• human rights language helps to bring this about

Question of appropriate intervention

New York City Human Rights Initiative (NYC HIR)

http://www.nychri.org/

From their website

• Vision: NYCHRI’s vision is to help end economic and social injustice and discrimination in New York City. By advancing the human rights framework in New York City, we envision moving toward a NYC in which all New Yorkers will have the right to housing, food, education, labor, criminal justice, health care, child welfare, and social welfare regardless of race, color, creed, age, national origin, alienage or citizenship status, gender (including gender identity and gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, or marital status.

From their “Frequently asked questions”

Q: How are “human rights” different than “civil rights”?A: Existing civil rights laws prohibit the government and in some instances

private actors from discriminating against people based on certain characteristics, such as race, gender, age, sexual orientation, national origin. Human rights principles provide a broader framework for preventing and eliminating the social and economic harms caused by discrimination. Under the human rights framework government agencies have an affirmative duty to promote equality of opportunity so that every member of the community is able to participate fully in economic, cultural, social and political activities.

Target

• Human Rights in Government Operations Audit Law (HR GOAL)

• Proactive approach to human rights standards – let’s supervise before litigation become necessary

• Perform audits to discover discriminatory practices (drawing on CEDAW and CERD)

• Women of Color Policy Network, the Human Rights Project at the Urban Justice Center, the New York Civil Liberties Union, Legal Momentum (formerly NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund), Amnesty International USA, and the American Civil Liberties Union.

• Human Rights Project at the Urban Justice Center is the lead coordinating organization.