A Voice For the Voiceless
MISSION
The Advocacy Project seeks to help community-based advocates produce, disseminate and use information, and so become more effective advocates for human rights and social justice
FROM THE PHOTO LIBRARy
www.flickr.com
This is a Flickr badge showing photos in a set called Best of AP. Make your own badge here.
Resources
> Global Issues
> Covering the UN
> Children's Ri...
> September 7, 2001
Part Two:
Editorial - Shrinking Vision
In January of this year, UNICEF unveiled the first draft of its so-called Outcome Document ('A World Fit for Children') at the second meeting of the Preparatory Committee in New York. The intention was to draft an inspired document for the Special Session that could serve as a blueprint for the protection and development of children well into the new millennium.
It is hard to relate this bold mission to the drafting process that is currently under way in New York. If governments have this much trouble expressing their vision for children, we dread to think of how they will go about putting it into practice.
The third PrepCom (in June) was supposed to complete work on the Outcome document. It ended without agreement on a clutch of highly controversial issues - reproductive rights, child labor, foreign occupation, mobilizing resources, the death penalty, juvenile justice, and the role of the Convention on the Rights of the Child in any future international action plan.
The negotiations then resumed on July 27 for a week, only to end once more without agreement. If anything, positions hardened as governments were forced to show their hand. UNICEF and the conference Bureau had prepared a series of compromise positions. These were presented and rejected out of hand.
Governments were back at it this week. Although there are definite signs of an emerging compromise, several issues remain extremely controversial as we go to press. One is reproductive rights. Another is the impact of foreign occupation and terrorism on children. Yet another is how to mobilize money for children's programs. Our information is that the talks will have to resume on Monday. So they are not yet out of the woods.
It is time for civil society to register dismay and anger at the way governments are going about this historic mandate. Back in June, at another Special Session of the General Assembly, governments were able to draft an imaginative action plan to combat AIDS in a matter of days. They also agreed to dig into their pockets to pay for it. They are showing no such urgency on behalf of children. If anything, politics are taking precedence over children as the PrepCom drafting draws to a close:
As a result, the Bush Administration is giving the disastrous impression that it cares more about retaining the death penalty and outlawing abortion (a practice which is still legal in the United States) than it does about protecting children. Instead of holding their ground, European governments seem ready to concede on the death penalty if only to ensure that the Unites States does not walk out. This is blackmail of a high order.
There is plenty to be worried about as the PrepCom limps towards the finishing line.
In the News:
US Charged With Hypocrisy at PrepCom After Bush's Endorsement of 'Reproductive Health Services' in Quebec
by Gabrielle Engh
The Bush Administration is fighting hard to prevent the Special Session from endorsing the right to 'reproductive health services' less than six months after President Bush personally committed the US to a multilateral treaty that aims to 'intensify efforts to provide quality reproductive health care and services for women, men and adolescents.'
Meanwhile, governments from Latin America and Europe have resoundingly rejected a proposal by the US at the PrepCom to substitute 'reproductive health care' for 'reproductive health services' in an effort to steer the Special Session away from any possible endorsement of abortion. The US proposal was rebuffed last Friday, resulting in a deadlock that some fear could conceivably result in a US withdrawal.
Mr. Bush personally endorsed 'reproductive health services for adolescents' when he signed the Quebec Declaration on April 22, 2001 at the conclusion of the 3rd Summit of the Americas.
The Quebec agreement included a Declaration and plan of action and was signed by 34 Heads of State from North, South and Central America. The language on reproductive services came in section 14 of the Plan of Action, which concerns health. Section 14 also commits signatories – including the United States – to 'carry out commitments made at the Cairo International Conference on Population and Development and its five-year follow-up in New York.'
Given this, many advocates for child rights and women's rights at the PrepCom have been startled and angered at the US position during the final stages of negotiations over the Outcome document.
Delegates were shocked early last week to read an article in the Washington Post warning that the United States could boycott the Special Session because the Outcome document included language on 'abortion services.' This came as the United States was pulling out of the World Racism Conference in Durban and cast a pall over the PrepCom negotiations.
But the Post article also drew the fire of Congressional members and NGOs who immediately launched a major letter writing campaign. A letter to Secretary of State Colin Powell signed by more than ten members of Congress reminded him that reproductive health care and services are vital to saving women's lives, and that abortion is legal in the United States.
Faced by this criticism, the Administration pulled back and offered the PrepCom a 'compromise.' Speaking at an informal briefing for NGOs last week, Dr. William Steiger, Special Adviser at the US Department of Health and Human Services, said the United States could not agree to 'reproductive health services' because it is used by some governments to mean abortion. But, he said, the United States would be prepared to accept 'reproductive health care.' Delegates said that US might accept 'reproductive health services' if a paragraph was added specifying that this would exclude abortion.
This was the proposal that was put to the PrepCom plenary last Friday and immediately rejected.
Delegates have told On the Record that both the Rio group of Latin American governments and the European Union are opposed to 'reproductive health care' because they feel this would turn the clock back on the Cairo and Beijing conferences. This would set an unacceptable precedent for the future.
Most NGOs agree that excluding services would seriously weaken the commitment towards the health of women and adolescents that was made at Cairo and Beijing, and that viewing 'services' as a code-word for abortion is a red herring.
'The real point about services is that it allows women and girls a choice which the current US administration appears to oppose,' said Dr. Joyce Braak, President of the Institute for Research on Women's Health and main UN representative of the Medical Women's International Association. 'Care is 'reactive' because it is only administered when you are sick. Services empower people to be 'proactive' about what they want and can choose.'
By its stand, the US is denying people the right to anything beyond the absolute essentials to prevent death and impairment, said Dr. Braak.
'We want a broad range of health care services for adolescents in the document,' explained Françoise Girard, Senior Program Officer of International Policy at the International Women's Health Coalition. 'The US has turned the issue of reproductive health care, including information, education and services into a battleground over abortion.'
Most NGOs are convinced that the Bush administration has taken the political decision to pander to the right wing, and they hope that this tactic may now be backfiring. Since last Tuesday, five major articles about the US position have appeared in several US and international news outlets. This marks a distinctly different tone from PrepComs II and III, which had virtually no mainstream media coverage.
It remains uncertain whether the Quebec agreement will push the US to change its position. But some governments, particularly those in the Rio group, appear ready to use the Quebec text to expose what they view as blatant US hypocrisy.
NGOs Protest Their Exclusion From the PrepCom
by On the Record Staff
NGOs have reacted angrily to the decision to exclude all NGOs from the current round of informal PrepCom negotiations.
As this issue of On the Record goes out, no fewer than three separate NGO protests have been issued or are being prepared. They come from the Steering Group of the UNICEF Committee on NGO (which sponsors this newsletter); from Human Rights Watch; and from the Conference of Non-Governmental Organizations in Consultative Relationship with the United Nations (CONGO).
These coalitions represent hundreds of NGOs, and their protests indicate the frustration and anger felt over the treatment of NGOs as the negotiations over the Outcome document enter the final stretch.
The trouble arose last week (August 27) when governments resumed their latest review of the latest draft. To all intents, this was a continuation of the Third Preparatory Committee meeting in June, which was open to NGOs.
The major difference is that governments are now tackling the most sensitive issues which have so far resisted compromise. Even so, several NGO made their way into the plenary session last week and were told by several delegates and UNICEF officials that there would be no problem if they 'kept their heads down.'
The Indian delegation began confronting NGOs on Monday night, but it was not until Tuesday evening that the doors were shut on everyone who was not from governments. According to some, this was done in a rude and even intimidating manner.
Some said that the Indians had taken offense at being interviewed by a journalist over child labour. There was also speculation that delegations were unnerved by an article in the Washington Post on Tuesday warning that the Bush Administration might withdraw from the Special Session if the United States did not get its way on the reproductive health issue. It is seen as ironic that the United States was able to exploit the press to put pressure on the PrepCom even as NGOs were being prevented from covering the meeting.
Human Rights Watch was the first to protest, in a letter that sent to UNICEF's Executive Director Carol Bellamy on Wednesday. Ms. Bellamy is in Durban and was unable to reply.
Leslie Wright, from the World Association of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts (WAGGS) then sent a letter of protest to the Chairperson of the PrepCom Bureau, Ambassador Patricia Durrant from Jamaica.
Acting in her capacity as a Vice-President of CONGO, Ms. Wright wrote: 'The Conference of NGOs believes that the United Nations is stronger because of the participation of NGOs. If there are specific actions by NGOs that have created a situation whereby all of us are banned, CONGO would like to assist in mediating those problems so that all NGOs can once again observe the proceedings.' As of writing, the NGO Committee on UNICEF is also preparing a formal protest.
These protests reflect a rising level of concern among many NGOs that the Outcome document is being severely watered down behind closed doors. This, they say, increases the importance of having civil society monitor the negotiations.
Ms. Wright told On the Record that the absence of NGOs during the process renders the proceedings irrelevant. 'We (NGOs) have information that could make a difference,' she added.
Global Movement for Children Must Reach Out to Kids and Clarify its Message, Says Review Meeting
by On the Record Staff
The Global Movement for Children (GMC) needs to better involve children, clarify its message, and work out better ways of working with the private sector if it is to play a significant role in helping civil society to follow up on the Special Session.
This was the message of a two-day review workshop on the GMC that met in London July 30-31. The meeting brought together representatives from a range of NGOs and was held at the London headquarters of Plan International, which helped to launch the GMC in January this year together with UNICEF and five other leading NGOs. (Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee - BRAC; Net.org Foundation; Save the Children; UNICEF and World Vision.) A draft of the rapporteur's report has been provided to On the Record.
The initial aim of the GMC was to create a groundswell of grassroots support for children and mobilize civil society in the run-up to the Special Session. A subsequent campaign, known as 'Say Yes to Children' identified ten rallying points corresponding to ten of the key goals of the Special Session.
In the eight months since, 293 organizations have pledged support for the GMC and the movement has received approximately twenty million individual pledges - most via the internet.
According to a report from the London meeting, the GMC has succeeded in sparking 'considerable mobilization' at the local level. Coalitions have formed, and more and more groups appear to be adapting the rallying points to their own local conditions.
This has raised hopes that the GMC can grow into a real global movement and help civil society to hold governments accountable for promises made at the Special Session. This could become critically important if the conference ('Outcome') document turns out to be a weak compromise.
The report concludes that UNICEF made a mistake at the 1990 World Summit for Children in only trying to work with governments that attended the Summit, and not civil society. 'Much still remains to be achieved from the (1990) Summit,' it concludes.
The London meeting predicted that the GMC could last for up to ten years. But, it said, the GMC needs to sharpen its image and work out a way of engaging its primary stakeholders, namely community groups and children.
The report makes it clear that there remains a underlying tension between a top-down movement that has been conceived and directed by UNICEF and some of the world's largest NGOs on the one hand, and a genuine 'bottom up' grassroots movement on the other.
In particular, the report concedes that there has been 'some confusion' over messages. It suggests there is an urgent need for some clear thinking on the links between the plethora of slogans and documents - the 'Say Yes for Children' campaign, the Rallying Call, the Action Matrix, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and even the Outcome Document.
The report also expresses concern that children remain detached and uninvolved from the GMC. 'At present, children do not see the GMC as truly participatory,' it says. 'Contacting a few young people a week before on an ad hoc basis for their views or to go to a conference is not how children wish to be consulted. There is no ownership of the process as it stands.'
Equally striking are the report's decidedly nuanced conclusions on the merits of working with the private sector, which it describes as both 'an enemy and a friend.' It suggests that any participation by the private sector should be on the GMC's terms and is more likely to be effective at the local level.
US and Poland Beat Back an Attempt to Curb the Internet
by Christine Gordon
The United States and Poland have successfully beaten back an attempt by several governments, including Cuba, to protect children by imposing curbs on the Internet.
Cuba had joined several governments from Latin America and Africa to propose that the Outcome document 'encourage measures to protect children from violent or harmful websites, computer programmes and games that negatively influence the psychological development of children.'
At the suggestion of Poland and the US, delegates decided to add the following wording: 'taking into account the responsibility of family, parents, legal guardians and caregivers.' This would leave control of the internet with parents and caregivers rather than governments. After first dissenting, Cuba, Benin and the Ivory Coast accepted the addition.
The mood of the debate, which took place behind closed doors, was described as 'positive' by an attache from the Holy See, Rev. Msgr. Anthony Frontiero.
This amounts to the first attempt by a major UN conference to control the excesses of the Internet, and many NGOs are not surprised that it has happened at a meeting on children. There is growing concern throughout the world at the impact of online pornography and violence on the wellbeing of children. Online pornography is even suspected of encouraging the trafficking of children into the sex trade.
But the United States and Poland appeared to feel that such concerns are outweighed by the threat to freedom of expression online. Most observers now feel that their amendment will reduce the possibility of governments using the Outcome document to impose more regulation on the internet.
In spite of this, several US-based free-speech organizations that were contacted by On the Record said they were still concerned by the paragraph as a whole.
A spokesperson for San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a non-profit organization that is committed to protecting online rights, agreed that while the language seemed to put the mouse back in the hands of parents, it could leave the door open for future government curbs by failing to come out specifically against regulation.
In an email to On the Record, Lee Tien, a lawyer for the EFF, described his organization as quite skeptical about vague exhortations about 'violent or harmful' speech or speech 'that negatively influence[s]' children's psychological development.'
'Who decides what speech is violent, harmful, or whatever? What's the standard?' he asked.
Another US-based group that is concerned with online rights, the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT), viewed the language with less skepticism. 'It seems to be a very positive message that says we encourage parents and educators and we want to put users in control,' said Ari Schwartz, associate director of CDT.
Mr. Schwartz added that the United States had been instrumental in issuing restrictive mandates concerning the Internet in the past.
Girls Initiative Seeks NGO Allies as Governments Downgrade the Special Problems Facing Girls
by On the Record Staff
An initiative to win support for a strong NGO platform on behalf of girls is facing opposition by the United States and – more surprisingly – indifference on the part of several major NGOs.
The initiative takes the form of a statement which seeks to draw attention to the unique pressures facing girls. It is being promoted by an informal NGO grouping known as 'Girls As Their Own Advocates' which emerged at the Beijing Conference and has been re-invigorated by the Special Session process.
The statement has been signed so far by over 25 NGOs, including Zonta International and The Elizabeth Seton Foundation. But some notable NGOs have yet to sign on.
This has dismayed authors of the statement, who are already facing severe skepticism from the United States and Holy See. These two governments argue that highlighting the special needs of girls downplays the needs of boys. As a result, they prefer the use of 'children.'
Leslie Wright, a Vice-president of the Conference on NonGovernmental Organizations (CONGO)and leading member of 'Girls As Their Own Advocates' said that girls 'deserve gender-specific protection' in key paragraphs of the Outcome document because they are at greater risk than boys. This is particularly the case when it comes to AIDS.
'Not to take a strong position in support of girls is unconscionable,' said Wright. 'Girls are the ones who don't have a voice.'
The NGO statement urges governments to make concerted efforts for girls to eradicate discrimination, enforce education, promote access to high quality primary and reproductive health care, as well as nutrition and a safe environment, recognizing the particular needs of the girl child.
'It is vital that national goals for children include specific mention of girls and targets for reducing disparities, many of which arise from discrimination and form a core violation of the rights of the child. This will help highlight gaps in performance and focus efforts on reducing disparities between girls and boys, bringing attention to the situation of girls, who often remain unseen, undocumented and unnoticed,' reads the statement.
The NGO statement has been circulated to negotiating groups, including the Rio group, where it has met with support. The EU has been less enthusiastic, according to Wright.
Meanwhile, Finland has been asked to sponsor a Girls As Their Own Advocates speak-out next Thursday at the Beekman. The featured speaker is expected to be Charlotte Abaka, chair of the Convention for the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women.
NGOs Prepare for the Special Session:
- US NGOs to Hold Briefing on Special Session:
The US Fund for UNICEF will organize briefing by American NGOs on the Special Session on Monday 10, between 9 am and noon, at its New York headquarters. On the agenda: an NGO perspective on the PrepCom discussions (including the controversies) and the Special Session itself. Aimed at US-based NGOs interested in, but not accredited to the Special Session. Details available on the NGO committee website, or call Meg Gardinier: 212 922 2594.
- Youth Forum Fully Subscribed:
350 young (under-18) delegates are expected at the three-day youth forum (September 15-18) prior to the Special Session. The Forum is being organized by UNICEF, with assistance by the NGOs (including the under-18 taskforce of the NGO Committee for UNICEF). Media interest has been high and Forum organizers are anticipating a lively and successful meeting. At the same time, the Forum is oversubscribed and two orientation sessions are scheduled for Tuesday (September 18) for young people who cannot attend. At this time no further registrations can be accomodated. On the Record will publish a supplement on the Forum, using articles by young journalists.
- Up to 5,000 Expected At Candlelight Vigil:
Thousands of children and supporters are expected to participate in a march for child rights on the eve of the Special Session. The march will begin in Columbus Circle at 4:00 pm on Tuesday and end with a candlelight vigil outside the UN at 7:pm. Contact 'Kids Meeting Kids' - 212 662 - 2327.
- NGOs to Strut Their Stuff at Global Gallery:
Fifty NGOs from around the world have applied to participate in a series of cultural events and exhibitions that will take place in UNICEF Hall during the Special Session. The so-called 'Global Gallery' is being organized by the nine regional groups of the NGO Committee for UNICEF. One participant, Kanya-Donse-Fany from Africa, plans to use a cooking display to illustrate the role of the African woman in providing nutrition for children. The Gallery will be launched at a reception Tuesday night, attended by Carol Bellamy.
- An Orientation Session for NGOs on the Special Session will take place Tuesday (2pm to 4pm) in the basement of UNICEF House. Ambassador Patricia Durrant from Jamaica, Chairperson of the Conference Bureau, has been invited. Details will be posted on the NGO website.
- NGO Plenary:
An NGO plenary discussion will take place at lunchtime during the three days of the Special Session in UN Conference room 13. Themes: civil society looks beyond the Special Session (Wednesday); regional perspectives (Thursday); how children plan to follow up on the Special Session (Friday).
- NGO Side Events:
Over 100 NGO side events are planned during the Special Session. Almost all will be taking place at the Church Center (44th street) because all available rooms at the UN have been reserved by UN agencies. Details will be posted on the NGO website.
- For the official calendar of special session events and debates see UNICEF's website. As of September 8, 76 heads of state have registered.
PrepCom Analysis - On The Slippery Slope to Consensus
By Iain Guest
– Angered at being ejected from the PrepCom, NGO now fear a compromise text that lacks inspiration –
Worried by the pressure of time and unnerved by the United States walkout from the World Conference in Durban, delegations to the third PrepCom appear to be moving slowly towards agreement on the key outstanding issues in the Outcome document.
The negotiations resumed on August 27 and then broke off last Friday in complete deadlock, before restarting again on Wednesday of this week.
As of Thursday night, the talks appeared to be far apart on reproductive rights, resources and foreign occupation. But delegates also suggested that the gap is narrowing considerably and that agreement might be near on child labor, the Convention on the Rights of the Child and even the death penalty. All of these issues have proved exceptionally difficult. (See On the Record Volume 2 #8 for an analysis).
If a breakthrough can be achieved, it will be due to the fact that the PrepCom is rapidly running out of time. But the delegates are also feeling pressure from the US withdrawal in Durban, which has shown just how far the Bush Administration is prepared to go in expressing disapproval of UN initiatives that it dislikes.
Early last week the Bush Administration publicly let it be known that it might also snub the Special Session if it does not specifically disavow abortion. The Administration quickly back-tracked after a storm of protest. But the point had been made, and observers say that the European Union is desperate to avoid provoking and isolating the United States.
Some are even predicting that the EU will agree to drop its demand that the Outcome document ban the application of the death penalty for crimes committed under the age of 18. This has been adamantly opposed by the United States.
By Thursday night, there were also reports that delegates were close to consensus on child labour and perhaps even the language used to refer to the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Both issues have held up the drafting and caused growing tension between the United States and its European allies. (For background see On the Record Volume 2 #8).
Reproductive rights, resources and foreign occupation are still seen as potential deal-breakers, particularly after the withdrawal of the US and Israel from the World Conference on Racism. The United States withdrew after the Conference adopted language that singled out Israel for criticism and delegates to the PrepCom are worried that the Arab-Israeli dispute could spill over into the Special Session. Arab governments have insisted on inserting several references to the impact of foreign occupation on children into the Outcome document. Israel, in return, has demanded a reference to terrorism in the same articles.
All sides are now struggling to defuse this potential time-bomb, and American delegates have reportedly met at the UN with the Palestinian delegation in an attempt to find compromise language. The most likely compromise is said to be fewer references to both terrorism and foreign occupation, and in more appropriate places in the Outcome text. Optimists also point out that Israel is not singled out by name, as it was in Durban.
The meeting is also finding it hard come up with consensus language on how to generate more resources for children's programs. A hard core of Arab and African governments (the so-called 'Some Developing Countries') want Western governments to recommit themselves to giving 0.7 percent of their GNP in development aid, in line with previously agreed targets. Western governments say that the burden of raising the money should rest with national governments. According to reports, the SDC group has increased the pressure by insisting that this be resolved first, before any other deals can be struck.
One major problem facing NGOs is that they are totally in the dark after being ejected from the PrepCom discussions early last week. Delegates have proved extraordinarily reluctant to divulge details.
This has caused widespread anger among NGO observers. It has also raised fears that governments may be negotiating the heart out of the Outcome document behind closed doors in an attempt to reach consensus. This could dilute the Outcome document to the point where it is totally lacking in inspiration, and set the clock back on a decade of progress on child rights.
It is in this context that child rights advocates will be looking very carefully at references to the Convention on the Rights of the Child in the Outcome document. At issue is whether the document will give the Convention an exclusive role as the sole normative framework for the protection of children.
This would give the Convention a pre-eminent role in any follow-up to the Special Session, and it is acceptable to virtually all governments except the United States which has not ratified the Convention. Anxious to avoid endorsing the Convention, the United States wants equal recognition for other international treaties that it does accept (including the ILO's convention 182 on the worst forms of child labour, and the Convention's two optional protocols on child soldiers and sexual exploitation).
According to reports, Ambassador Thomas Hammarberg from Sweden has suggested that the Outcome document follow the language of the 1990 World Summit on Children, which refers to the Convention as 'a comprehensive set of international legal norms for the protection and well-being of children.'
This is said to be acceptable to both sides. But the Europeans are also insisting that any reference to other instruments be put in a separate sentence, thus affording the Convention some exclusivity. That was rejected by the United States last Friday.
Some delegates are suggesting that a compromise looks increasingly likely. But some NGOs fear that references to the Convention are being squeezed out in the face of what they view as American blackmail.
A similar fate may be awaiting the prohibition against the death penalty. International opinion is moving inexorably against the application of the death penalty for crimes committed by children, and earlier this year the UN Human Rights Commission ignored opposition from the United States in passing a resolution that called for an end to the death penalty for crimes committed by under-18s and an across-the-board moratorium on the death penalty.
But the reverse would happen in the PrepCom if the European Union were to concede to the United States in the interests of reaching consensus.
One European delegate said that the death penalty is clearly covered by a prohibition in the Outcome document against 'cruel inhuman degrading treatment or punishment.' But the absence of a specific reference would certainly deprive abolitionists of an inspiring weapon in their campaign to improve and humanize juvenile justice.
Trade-offs like this, say NGOs, could reduce the Outcome document to an irrelevance.
September 7, 2001
OTR Kids 3, Issue 1/2
On the Record: Your Electronic Link to the UN General Assembly Special Session on Children
September 7, 2001
In The News:
- US Charged With Hypocrisy At PrepCom After Bush's Endorsement Of 'Reproductive Health Services' In Quebec
- NGOs Protest Their Exclusion From PrepCom Drafting
- Global Movement For Children Must Reach Out To Kids And Clarify Its Message Says Review Meeting
- US And Poland Beat Back An Attempt To Curb The Internet
- Girls Initiative Seeks NGO Allies As Governments Downgrade The Special Problems Facing Girls
- NGOs Prepare For the Special Session:
- Monday briefing for US NGOs
- Youth Forum
- 5,000 Expected At Candlelight Vigil
- Global Gallery
- Orientation Session
- NGO Plenary
- NGO Side Events
- Official Calendar
Part Two:
Editorial - Shrinking Vision
In January of this year, UNICEF unveiled the first draft of its so-called Outcome Document ('A World Fit for Children') at the second meeting of the Preparatory Committee in New York. The intention was to draft an inspired document for the Special Session that could serve as a blueprint for the protection and development of children well into the new millennium.
It is hard to relate this bold mission to the drafting process that is currently under way in New York. If governments have this much trouble expressing their vision for children, we dread to think of how they will go about putting it into practice.
The third PrepCom (in June) was supposed to complete work on the Outcome document. It ended without agreement on a clutch of highly controversial issues - reproductive rights, child labor, foreign occupation, mobilizing resources, the death penalty, juvenile justice, and the role of the Convention on the Rights of the Child in any future international action plan.
The negotiations then resumed on July 27 for a week, only to end once more without agreement. If anything, positions hardened as governments were forced to show their hand. UNICEF and the conference Bureau had prepared a series of compromise positions. These were presented and rejected out of hand.
Governments were back at it this week. Although there are definite signs of an emerging compromise, several issues remain extremely controversial as we go to press. One is reproductive rights. Another is the impact of foreign occupation and terrorism on children. Yet another is how to mobilize money for children's programs. Our information is that the talks will have to resume on Monday. So they are not yet out of the woods.
It is time for civil society to register dismay and anger at the way governments are going about this historic mandate. Back in June, at another Special Session of the General Assembly, governments were able to draft an imaginative action plan to combat AIDS in a matter of days. They also agreed to dig into their pockets to pay for it. They are showing no such urgency on behalf of children. If anything, politics are taking precedence over children as the PrepCom drafting draws to a close:
- Trade-offs: The contentious issues are increasingly viewed as a package. This bears no relation to their merit and the mere idea of trading concessions on, say, the death penalty in return for reproductive rights should be repugnant. But that is what happens when a negotiation runs out of time. Principle gives way to politics.
- Dilution. References to child rights are gradually being squeezed out of the Outcome document to the point where this might rightly be called the incredible shrinking vision. At the start, child rights advocates hoped for a text that would acknowledge the pre-eminent role of the Convention on the Rights of the Child – the most widely – ratified treaty in history. Instead, this conference could be forced to go back to the 1990 World Summit in an attempt to find acceptable wording. That is hardly visionary.
- Politicization. All the regional blocs are playing politics, but today we single out the so-called 'Some Developing Countries' for their truculent and unhelpful insistence on using this process to squeeze more development assistance from the West. It is lamentable that governments have failed to meet the internationally-agreed targets for ODA, but this is not the forum to pursue this crusade.
- The United States. We remain astonished at the irresponsibility of the Bush Administration, which seems determined to diminish the entire process. In their national discourse, Americans treat dilemmas like the death penalty for under-18s, abortion, and children's rights with the gravity that they deserve. Here in the PrepCom the US delegation has thrown these vital issues to the ideological wolves, to be savaged and devalued.
As a result, the Bush Administration is giving the disastrous impression that it cares more about retaining the death penalty and outlawing abortion (a practice which is still legal in the United States) than it does about protecting children. Instead of holding their ground, European governments seem ready to concede on the death penalty if only to ensure that the Unites States does not walk out. This is blackmail of a high order.
- The involvement of civil society. NGOs have been ejected and excluded from these negotiations. This robs the PrepCom of transparency, damages the credibility of the Outcome document, and makes it harder for civil society to implement any action plan that emerges from the Special Session. UNICEF should have understood this before it rushed to close the doors on NGOs.
There is plenty to be worried about as the PrepCom limps towards the finishing line.
In the News:
US Charged With Hypocrisy at PrepCom After Bush's Endorsement of 'Reproductive Health Services' in Quebec
by Gabrielle Engh
The Bush Administration is fighting hard to prevent the Special Session from endorsing the right to 'reproductive health services' less than six months after President Bush personally committed the US to a multilateral treaty that aims to 'intensify efforts to provide quality reproductive health care and services for women, men and adolescents.'
Meanwhile, governments from Latin America and Europe have resoundingly rejected a proposal by the US at the PrepCom to substitute 'reproductive health care' for 'reproductive health services' in an effort to steer the Special Session away from any possible endorsement of abortion. The US proposal was rebuffed last Friday, resulting in a deadlock that some fear could conceivably result in a US withdrawal.
Mr. Bush personally endorsed 'reproductive health services for adolescents' when he signed the Quebec Declaration on April 22, 2001 at the conclusion of the 3rd Summit of the Americas.
The Quebec agreement included a Declaration and plan of action and was signed by 34 Heads of State from North, South and Central America. The language on reproductive services came in section 14 of the Plan of Action, which concerns health. Section 14 also commits signatories – including the United States – to 'carry out commitments made at the Cairo International Conference on Population and Development and its five-year follow-up in New York.'
Given this, many advocates for child rights and women's rights at the PrepCom have been startled and angered at the US position during the final stages of negotiations over the Outcome document.
Delegates were shocked early last week to read an article in the Washington Post warning that the United States could boycott the Special Session because the Outcome document included language on 'abortion services.' This came as the United States was pulling out of the World Racism Conference in Durban and cast a pall over the PrepCom negotiations.
But the Post article also drew the fire of Congressional members and NGOs who immediately launched a major letter writing campaign. A letter to Secretary of State Colin Powell signed by more than ten members of Congress reminded him that reproductive health care and services are vital to saving women's lives, and that abortion is legal in the United States.
Faced by this criticism, the Administration pulled back and offered the PrepCom a 'compromise.' Speaking at an informal briefing for NGOs last week, Dr. William Steiger, Special Adviser at the US Department of Health and Human Services, said the United States could not agree to 'reproductive health services' because it is used by some governments to mean abortion. But, he said, the United States would be prepared to accept 'reproductive health care.' Delegates said that US might accept 'reproductive health services' if a paragraph was added specifying that this would exclude abortion.
This was the proposal that was put to the PrepCom plenary last Friday and immediately rejected.
Delegates have told On the Record that both the Rio group of Latin American governments and the European Union are opposed to 'reproductive health care' because they feel this would turn the clock back on the Cairo and Beijing conferences. This would set an unacceptable precedent for the future.
Most NGOs agree that excluding services would seriously weaken the commitment towards the health of women and adolescents that was made at Cairo and Beijing, and that viewing 'services' as a code-word for abortion is a red herring.
'The real point about services is that it allows women and girls a choice which the current US administration appears to oppose,' said Dr. Joyce Braak, President of the Institute for Research on Women's Health and main UN representative of the Medical Women's International Association. 'Care is 'reactive' because it is only administered when you are sick. Services empower people to be 'proactive' about what they want and can choose.'
By its stand, the US is denying people the right to anything beyond the absolute essentials to prevent death and impairment, said Dr. Braak.
'We want a broad range of health care services for adolescents in the document,' explained Françoise Girard, Senior Program Officer of International Policy at the International Women's Health Coalition. 'The US has turned the issue of reproductive health care, including information, education and services into a battleground over abortion.'
Most NGOs are convinced that the Bush administration has taken the political decision to pander to the right wing, and they hope that this tactic may now be backfiring. Since last Tuesday, five major articles about the US position have appeared in several US and international news outlets. This marks a distinctly different tone from PrepComs II and III, which had virtually no mainstream media coverage.
It remains uncertain whether the Quebec agreement will push the US to change its position. But some governments, particularly those in the Rio group, appear ready to use the Quebec text to expose what they view as blatant US hypocrisy.
NGOs Protest Their Exclusion From the PrepCom
by On the Record Staff
NGOs have reacted angrily to the decision to exclude all NGOs from the current round of informal PrepCom negotiations.
As this issue of On the Record goes out, no fewer than three separate NGO protests have been issued or are being prepared. They come from the Steering Group of the UNICEF Committee on NGO (which sponsors this newsletter); from Human Rights Watch; and from the Conference of Non-Governmental Organizations in Consultative Relationship with the United Nations (CONGO).
These coalitions represent hundreds of NGOs, and their protests indicate the frustration and anger felt over the treatment of NGOs as the negotiations over the Outcome document enter the final stretch.
The trouble arose last week (August 27) when governments resumed their latest review of the latest draft. To all intents, this was a continuation of the Third Preparatory Committee meeting in June, which was open to NGOs.
The major difference is that governments are now tackling the most sensitive issues which have so far resisted compromise. Even so, several NGO made their way into the plenary session last week and were told by several delegates and UNICEF officials that there would be no problem if they 'kept their heads down.'
The Indian delegation began confronting NGOs on Monday night, but it was not until Tuesday evening that the doors were shut on everyone who was not from governments. According to some, this was done in a rude and even intimidating manner.
Some said that the Indians had taken offense at being interviewed by a journalist over child labour. There was also speculation that delegations were unnerved by an article in the Washington Post on Tuesday warning that the Bush Administration might withdraw from the Special Session if the United States did not get its way on the reproductive health issue. It is seen as ironic that the United States was able to exploit the press to put pressure on the PrepCom even as NGOs were being prevented from covering the meeting.
Human Rights Watch was the first to protest, in a letter that sent to UNICEF's Executive Director Carol Bellamy on Wednesday. Ms. Bellamy is in Durban and was unable to reply.
Leslie Wright, from the World Association of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts (WAGGS) then sent a letter of protest to the Chairperson of the PrepCom Bureau, Ambassador Patricia Durrant from Jamaica.
Acting in her capacity as a Vice-President of CONGO, Ms. Wright wrote: 'The Conference of NGOs believes that the United Nations is stronger because of the participation of NGOs. If there are specific actions by NGOs that have created a situation whereby all of us are banned, CONGO would like to assist in mediating those problems so that all NGOs can once again observe the proceedings.' As of writing, the NGO Committee on UNICEF is also preparing a formal protest.
These protests reflect a rising level of concern among many NGOs that the Outcome document is being severely watered down behind closed doors. This, they say, increases the importance of having civil society monitor the negotiations.
Ms. Wright told On the Record that the absence of NGOs during the process renders the proceedings irrelevant. 'We (NGOs) have information that could make a difference,' she added.
Global Movement for Children Must Reach Out to Kids and Clarify its Message, Says Review Meeting
by On the Record Staff
The Global Movement for Children (GMC) needs to better involve children, clarify its message, and work out better ways of working with the private sector if it is to play a significant role in helping civil society to follow up on the Special Session.
This was the message of a two-day review workshop on the GMC that met in London July 30-31. The meeting brought together representatives from a range of NGOs and was held at the London headquarters of Plan International, which helped to launch the GMC in January this year together with UNICEF and five other leading NGOs. (Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee - BRAC; Net.org Foundation; Save the Children; UNICEF and World Vision.) A draft of the rapporteur's report has been provided to On the Record.
The initial aim of the GMC was to create a groundswell of grassroots support for children and mobilize civil society in the run-up to the Special Session. A subsequent campaign, known as 'Say Yes to Children' identified ten rallying points corresponding to ten of the key goals of the Special Session.
In the eight months since, 293 organizations have pledged support for the GMC and the movement has received approximately twenty million individual pledges - most via the internet.
According to a report from the London meeting, the GMC has succeeded in sparking 'considerable mobilization' at the local level. Coalitions have formed, and more and more groups appear to be adapting the rallying points to their own local conditions.
This has raised hopes that the GMC can grow into a real global movement and help civil society to hold governments accountable for promises made at the Special Session. This could become critically important if the conference ('Outcome') document turns out to be a weak compromise.
The report concludes that UNICEF made a mistake at the 1990 World Summit for Children in only trying to work with governments that attended the Summit, and not civil society. 'Much still remains to be achieved from the (1990) Summit,' it concludes.
The London meeting predicted that the GMC could last for up to ten years. But, it said, the GMC needs to sharpen its image and work out a way of engaging its primary stakeholders, namely community groups and children.
The report makes it clear that there remains a underlying tension between a top-down movement that has been conceived and directed by UNICEF and some of the world's largest NGOs on the one hand, and a genuine 'bottom up' grassroots movement on the other.
In particular, the report concedes that there has been 'some confusion' over messages. It suggests there is an urgent need for some clear thinking on the links between the plethora of slogans and documents - the 'Say Yes for Children' campaign, the Rallying Call, the Action Matrix, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and even the Outcome Document.
The report also expresses concern that children remain detached and uninvolved from the GMC. 'At present, children do not see the GMC as truly participatory,' it says. 'Contacting a few young people a week before on an ad hoc basis for their views or to go to a conference is not how children wish to be consulted. There is no ownership of the process as it stands.'
Equally striking are the report's decidedly nuanced conclusions on the merits of working with the private sector, which it describes as both 'an enemy and a friend.' It suggests that any participation by the private sector should be on the GMC's terms and is more likely to be effective at the local level.
- For more information and contacts: visit the website of the Child Rights Information Network.
US and Poland Beat Back an Attempt to Curb the Internet
by Christine Gordon
The United States and Poland have successfully beaten back an attempt by several governments, including Cuba, to protect children by imposing curbs on the Internet.
Cuba had joined several governments from Latin America and Africa to propose that the Outcome document 'encourage measures to protect children from violent or harmful websites, computer programmes and games that negatively influence the psychological development of children.'
At the suggestion of Poland and the US, delegates decided to add the following wording: 'taking into account the responsibility of family, parents, legal guardians and caregivers.' This would leave control of the internet with parents and caregivers rather than governments. After first dissenting, Cuba, Benin and the Ivory Coast accepted the addition.
The mood of the debate, which took place behind closed doors, was described as 'positive' by an attache from the Holy See, Rev. Msgr. Anthony Frontiero.
This amounts to the first attempt by a major UN conference to control the excesses of the Internet, and many NGOs are not surprised that it has happened at a meeting on children. There is growing concern throughout the world at the impact of online pornography and violence on the wellbeing of children. Online pornography is even suspected of encouraging the trafficking of children into the sex trade.
But the United States and Poland appeared to feel that such concerns are outweighed by the threat to freedom of expression online. Most observers now feel that their amendment will reduce the possibility of governments using the Outcome document to impose more regulation on the internet.
In spite of this, several US-based free-speech organizations that were contacted by On the Record said they were still concerned by the paragraph as a whole.
A spokesperson for San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a non-profit organization that is committed to protecting online rights, agreed that while the language seemed to put the mouse back in the hands of parents, it could leave the door open for future government curbs by failing to come out specifically against regulation.
In an email to On the Record, Lee Tien, a lawyer for the EFF, described his organization as quite skeptical about vague exhortations about 'violent or harmful' speech or speech 'that negatively influence[s]' children's psychological development.'
'Who decides what speech is violent, harmful, or whatever? What's the standard?' he asked.
Another US-based group that is concerned with online rights, the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT), viewed the language with less skepticism. 'It seems to be a very positive message that says we encourage parents and educators and we want to put users in control,' said Ari Schwartz, associate director of CDT.
Mr. Schwartz added that the United States had been instrumental in issuing restrictive mandates concerning the Internet in the past.
Girls Initiative Seeks NGO Allies as Governments Downgrade the Special Problems Facing Girls
by On the Record Staff
An initiative to win support for a strong NGO platform on behalf of girls is facing opposition by the United States and – more surprisingly – indifference on the part of several major NGOs.
The initiative takes the form of a statement which seeks to draw attention to the unique pressures facing girls. It is being promoted by an informal NGO grouping known as 'Girls As Their Own Advocates' which emerged at the Beijing Conference and has been re-invigorated by the Special Session process.
The statement has been signed so far by over 25 NGOs, including Zonta International and The Elizabeth Seton Foundation. But some notable NGOs have yet to sign on.
This has dismayed authors of the statement, who are already facing severe skepticism from the United States and Holy See. These two governments argue that highlighting the special needs of girls downplays the needs of boys. As a result, they prefer the use of 'children.'
Leslie Wright, a Vice-president of the Conference on NonGovernmental Organizations (CONGO)and leading member of 'Girls As Their Own Advocates' said that girls 'deserve gender-specific protection' in key paragraphs of the Outcome document because they are at greater risk than boys. This is particularly the case when it comes to AIDS.
'Not to take a strong position in support of girls is unconscionable,' said Wright. 'Girls are the ones who don't have a voice.'
The NGO statement urges governments to make concerted efforts for girls to eradicate discrimination, enforce education, promote access to high quality primary and reproductive health care, as well as nutrition and a safe environment, recognizing the particular needs of the girl child.
'It is vital that national goals for children include specific mention of girls and targets for reducing disparities, many of which arise from discrimination and form a core violation of the rights of the child. This will help highlight gaps in performance and focus efforts on reducing disparities between girls and boys, bringing attention to the situation of girls, who often remain unseen, undocumented and unnoticed,' reads the statement.
The NGO statement has been circulated to negotiating groups, including the Rio group, where it has met with support. The EU has been less enthusiastic, according to Wright.
Meanwhile, Finland has been asked to sponsor a Girls As Their Own Advocates speak-out next Thursday at the Beekman. The featured speaker is expected to be Charlotte Abaka, chair of the Convention for the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women.
NGOs Prepare for the Special Session:
- US NGOs to Hold Briefing on Special Session:
The US Fund for UNICEF will organize briefing by American NGOs on the Special Session on Monday 10, between 9 am and noon, at its New York headquarters. On the agenda: an NGO perspective on the PrepCom discussions (including the controversies) and the Special Session itself. Aimed at US-based NGOs interested in, but not accredited to the Special Session. Details available on the NGO committee website, or call Meg Gardinier: 212 922 2594.
- Youth Forum Fully Subscribed:
350 young (under-18) delegates are expected at the three-day youth forum (September 15-18) prior to the Special Session. The Forum is being organized by UNICEF, with assistance by the NGOs (including the under-18 taskforce of the NGO Committee for UNICEF). Media interest has been high and Forum organizers are anticipating a lively and successful meeting. At the same time, the Forum is oversubscribed and two orientation sessions are scheduled for Tuesday (September 18) for young people who cannot attend. At this time no further registrations can be accomodated. On the Record will publish a supplement on the Forum, using articles by young journalists.
- Up to 5,000 Expected At Candlelight Vigil:
Thousands of children and supporters are expected to participate in a march for child rights on the eve of the Special Session. The march will begin in Columbus Circle at 4:00 pm on Tuesday and end with a candlelight vigil outside the UN at 7:pm. Contact 'Kids Meeting Kids' - 212 662 - 2327.
- NGOs to Strut Their Stuff at Global Gallery:
Fifty NGOs from around the world have applied to participate in a series of cultural events and exhibitions that will take place in UNICEF Hall during the Special Session. The so-called 'Global Gallery' is being organized by the nine regional groups of the NGO Committee for UNICEF. One participant, Kanya-Donse-Fany from Africa, plans to use a cooking display to illustrate the role of the African woman in providing nutrition for children. The Gallery will be launched at a reception Tuesday night, attended by Carol Bellamy.
- An Orientation Session for NGOs on the Special Session will take place Tuesday (2pm to 4pm) in the basement of UNICEF House. Ambassador Patricia Durrant from Jamaica, Chairperson of the Conference Bureau, has been invited. Details will be posted on the NGO website.
- NGO Plenary:
An NGO plenary discussion will take place at lunchtime during the three days of the Special Session in UN Conference room 13. Themes: civil society looks beyond the Special Session (Wednesday); regional perspectives (Thursday); how children plan to follow up on the Special Session (Friday).
- NGO Side Events:
Over 100 NGO side events are planned during the Special Session. Almost all will be taking place at the Church Center (44th street) because all available rooms at the UN have been reserved by UN agencies. Details will be posted on the NGO website.
- For the official calendar of special session events and debates see UNICEF's website. As of September 8, 76 heads of state have registered.
PrepCom Analysis - On The Slippery Slope to Consensus
By Iain Guest
– Angered at being ejected from the PrepCom, NGO now fear a compromise text that lacks inspiration –
Worried by the pressure of time and unnerved by the United States walkout from the World Conference in Durban, delegations to the third PrepCom appear to be moving slowly towards agreement on the key outstanding issues in the Outcome document.
The negotiations resumed on August 27 and then broke off last Friday in complete deadlock, before restarting again on Wednesday of this week.
As of Thursday night, the talks appeared to be far apart on reproductive rights, resources and foreign occupation. But delegates also suggested that the gap is narrowing considerably and that agreement might be near on child labor, the Convention on the Rights of the Child and even the death penalty. All of these issues have proved exceptionally difficult. (See On the Record Volume 2 #8 for an analysis).
If a breakthrough can be achieved, it will be due to the fact that the PrepCom is rapidly running out of time. But the delegates are also feeling pressure from the US withdrawal in Durban, which has shown just how far the Bush Administration is prepared to go in expressing disapproval of UN initiatives that it dislikes.
Early last week the Bush Administration publicly let it be known that it might also snub the Special Session if it does not specifically disavow abortion. The Administration quickly back-tracked after a storm of protest. But the point had been made, and observers say that the European Union is desperate to avoid provoking and isolating the United States.
Some are even predicting that the EU will agree to drop its demand that the Outcome document ban the application of the death penalty for crimes committed under the age of 18. This has been adamantly opposed by the United States.
By Thursday night, there were also reports that delegates were close to consensus on child labour and perhaps even the language used to refer to the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Both issues have held up the drafting and caused growing tension between the United States and its European allies. (For background see On the Record Volume 2 #8).
Reproductive rights, resources and foreign occupation are still seen as potential deal-breakers, particularly after the withdrawal of the US and Israel from the World Conference on Racism. The United States withdrew after the Conference adopted language that singled out Israel for criticism and delegates to the PrepCom are worried that the Arab-Israeli dispute could spill over into the Special Session. Arab governments have insisted on inserting several references to the impact of foreign occupation on children into the Outcome document. Israel, in return, has demanded a reference to terrorism in the same articles.
All sides are now struggling to defuse this potential time-bomb, and American delegates have reportedly met at the UN with the Palestinian delegation in an attempt to find compromise language. The most likely compromise is said to be fewer references to both terrorism and foreign occupation, and in more appropriate places in the Outcome text. Optimists also point out that Israel is not singled out by name, as it was in Durban.
The meeting is also finding it hard come up with consensus language on how to generate more resources for children's programs. A hard core of Arab and African governments (the so-called 'Some Developing Countries') want Western governments to recommit themselves to giving 0.7 percent of their GNP in development aid, in line with previously agreed targets. Western governments say that the burden of raising the money should rest with national governments. According to reports, the SDC group has increased the pressure by insisting that this be resolved first, before any other deals can be struck.
One major problem facing NGOs is that they are totally in the dark after being ejected from the PrepCom discussions early last week. Delegates have proved extraordinarily reluctant to divulge details.
This has caused widespread anger among NGO observers. It has also raised fears that governments may be negotiating the heart out of the Outcome document behind closed doors in an attempt to reach consensus. This could dilute the Outcome document to the point where it is totally lacking in inspiration, and set the clock back on a decade of progress on child rights.
It is in this context that child rights advocates will be looking very carefully at references to the Convention on the Rights of the Child in the Outcome document. At issue is whether the document will give the Convention an exclusive role as the sole normative framework for the protection of children.
This would give the Convention a pre-eminent role in any follow-up to the Special Session, and it is acceptable to virtually all governments except the United States which has not ratified the Convention. Anxious to avoid endorsing the Convention, the United States wants equal recognition for other international treaties that it does accept (including the ILO's convention 182 on the worst forms of child labour, and the Convention's two optional protocols on child soldiers and sexual exploitation).
According to reports, Ambassador Thomas Hammarberg from Sweden has suggested that the Outcome document follow the language of the 1990 World Summit on Children, which refers to the Convention as 'a comprehensive set of international legal norms for the protection and well-being of children.'
This is said to be acceptable to both sides. But the Europeans are also insisting that any reference to other instruments be put in a separate sentence, thus affording the Convention some exclusivity. That was rejected by the United States last Friday.
Some delegates are suggesting that a compromise looks increasingly likely. But some NGOs fear that references to the Convention are being squeezed out in the face of what they view as American blackmail.
A similar fate may be awaiting the prohibition against the death penalty. International opinion is moving inexorably against the application of the death penalty for crimes committed by children, and earlier this year the UN Human Rights Commission ignored opposition from the United States in passing a resolution that called for an end to the death penalty for crimes committed by under-18s and an across-the-board moratorium on the death penalty.
But the reverse would happen in the PrepCom if the European Union were to concede to the United States in the interests of reaching consensus.
One European delegate said that the death penalty is clearly covered by a prohibition in the Outcome document against 'cruel inhuman degrading treatment or punishment.' But the absence of a specific reference would certainly deprive abolitionists of an inspiring weapon in their campaign to improve and humanize juvenile justice.
Trade-offs like this, say NGOs, could reduce the Outcome document to an irrelevance.
Back
- News Service
- Multimedia
- Global Issues
- On The Record Archive
- Covering the UN
- Banning Landmines
- Children's Rights
- January 28, 2001
- January 29, 2001
- January 30, 2001
- January 31, 2001
- February 2, 2001
- February 11, 2001
- June 9, 2001
- June 11, 2001
- June 12, 2001
- June 13, 2001
- June 14, 2001
- June 15, 2001
- July 24, 2001
- July 30, 2001
- September 7, 2001
- October 23, 2001
- November 12, 2001
- December 20, 2001
- April 5, 2002
- April 17, 2002
- April 29, 2002
- May 2, 2002
- May 2, 2002
- Human Rights Defenders
- International Criminal Court
- The UN Refugee Agency (1998)
- Civil Society in Albania
- Afghanistan's Women & Girls
- Africa – Pygmies
- Bangladesh – Empowering the Blind
- Bosnia – War and Recovery
- Ecuador and Oil
- Guatemala – Indigenous Advocacy
- India – The Global Movement for Children
- Kosovo – Civil Society after the War
- Nepal – Democracy and Discrimination
- Nigeria – Trafficking to Europe
- Occupied Palestinian Territories
- Peru – The Search for Truth and Justice
- Roma and Gypsies
- Serbia – Fighting Repression
- Sri Lanka – Rebuilding After the Tsunami
- The World Bank and Human Rights
- UK Travellers and Dale Farm
- AP Diaries and Staff Blogs
Services
Fellows+
Dissemination+
Training+
.jpg)
FIND A PARTNER
The Advocacy Project develops partnerships with advocates on the frontline and with nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). In so doing, we take our cue from partners and tailor any support to their needs.