JBI Human Rights

JBI Statement on the Need for Urgent Human Rights Protection and Monitoring in Afghanistan

The crisis in Afghanistan requires urgent protection of people and their human rights. The Jacob Blaustein Institute for the Advancement of Human Rights (JBI) has released a statement that outlines the human rights dimensions of the situation and advises on what governments, acting individually and through international organizations, can and must do. It also recommends actions and principles to guide the responses of the United Nations system.  We call on the international community to ensure the safety of Afghans, particularly women and girls, who are most at risk under the Taliban, a UN designated terrorist organization.

As a matter of priority, JBI calls on governments to identify ways to evacuate women leaders, human rights defenders, and other at-risk persons, including US and NATO allies. JBI calls on member States at the UN to adopt a resolution both at the upcoming emergency session of the Human Rights Council as well as the UN General Assembly session for an effective monitoring and reporting mechanism. JBI also calls on the UN to state clearly that all UN system actors active in Afghanistan or engaging with the Taliban will adhere to a system-wide approach that prioritizes respect for human rights, which is a core purpose of the United Nations according to its Charter.

Please find our full statement and list of recommendations here.

China's 'Unconscionable' Campaign Against the Uyghurs: Stopping the Genocide Occurring on Our Watch

On May 5, 2021, Felice Gaer, Director of the Jacob Blaustein Institute for the Advancement of Human Rights (JBI), delivered the presentation below entitled, “China's 'Unconscionable' Campaign Against the Uyghurs: Stopping the Genocide Occurring on Our Watch.” Gaer discusses the reports of serious human rights violations perpetrated by the Chinese government against the Uyghur population and other Turkic Muslims in Xinjiang. She describes the legal components of the crime of genocide and the justifications that have been provided by the analysts and governments that have determined that China's conduct constitutes this crime. 

 

Gaer also discusses the reactions and measures taken by the U.S. and other governments in response to these allegations, as well as China’s reaction. Gaer also reviews the measures that JBI and other non-governmental organizations have taken to express concern about the situation facing the Uyghurs and to call for action to protect them, as well as additional measures that could encourage China to change course.

 

JBI Critiques the Draft Report of the Commission on Unalienable Rights, Calls for U.S. Foreign Policy to Uphold the Universality of Rights

In a public comment submitted on July 24, JBI called on the "Commission on Unalienable Rights" to substantially amend its draft report. The comment expresses alarm that the report will be used to support radical changes to the traditional U.S. approach to promoting human rights in its foreign policy, and particularly to encourage U.S. diplomats to provide tacit support and encouragement to governments that violate the human rights of members of certain historically marginalized groups, including women, LGBTQ people, and racial minorities.

The Commission, an independent advisory body established by U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in 2019, published its draft report on July 16. Among other shortcomings, the Commission's report subtly but clearly encourages the U.S. to reverse its longstanding position on the universality of human rights, as set out in the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action (VDPA). It justifies this by claiming that countries’ “particularities” and “backgrounds” allow them some “leeway” in the implementation of their human rights commitments and suggests that human rights claims lacking a “clear consensus across a broad plurality of different traditions and cultures” might be illegitimate.

JBI's Comment draws particular attention to the Commission's very troubling treatment of the second sentence of paragraph 5 of the VDPA, which reads:

“While the significance of national and regional particularities and various historical, cultural and religious backgrounds must be borne in mind, it is the duty of States, regardless of their political, economic and cultural systems, to promote and protect all human rights and fundamental freedoms.”

The first part of this sentence is a legacy of what is known as the “Bangkok Declaration,” the Final Declaration of the Regional Meeting for Asia that preceded the 1993 Vienna World Conference, which was reportedly particularly influenced by the governments of Malaysia and China. These words of the VDPA, and the Bangkok Declaration as a whole, are generally interpreted as aimed at repudiating the universality of human rights in favor of "cultural relativism." The U.S. strongly opposed this language at Vienna and insisted successfully on the inclusion of other language in the VDPA that reaffirms that “the universal nature of these rights and freedoms is beyond question.” The U.S. also insisted that the sentence be read together with the sentence of paragraph 5 that precedes it, which proclaims that “All human rights are universal, indivisible and interdependent and interrelated.”

Yet rather than stressing these latter aspects of the VDPA, the Commission's report instead places great weight on the first part of the sentence as evidence of the existence and importance of the principle of "subsidiarity" - the notion that States must be given a degree of "leeway" in upholding their human rights commitments. As often done by States that seek to justify departures from universal rights standards, the draft report then suggests that the U.S. should generally refrain from endorsing or supporting “new” human rights claims made by “competing groups in society over political priorities,” and should leave such issues to be resolved through “ordinary democratic processes.” An earlier reference in the report to “abortion, affirmative action, [and] same-sex marriage” as examples of “divisive social and political controversies” in the U.S. in which “both sides couch their claims in terms of basic rights” suggests that the report is intended to be read as recommending that U.S. should not engage on these or similar human rights issues – particularly claims about laws and policies that discriminate against women, racial minorities, and LGBTQ people – in its foreign policy.

Since 1993 the U.S. has repeatedly invoked the VDPA to reject attempts by governments – including but not limited to Iran – to cite religious or cultural traditions of the majority of their citizens as a justification for denying equal treatment to individuals belonging to marginalized groups. The Commission's report, on the other hand, would seem to urge U.S. officials to exercise caution and be silent in the face of human rights violations justified by their perpetrators with reference to their cultural or religious background, and to expressly rely on the VDPA in support of such a position.  As JBI's comment points out, the Commission's report thus urges the U.S. to completely reverse the approach that it traditionally has taken with respect to the principle of universality, and its precise articulation in the VDPA. 

JBI's comment urges the Commission to amend the text of its draft report to more accurately describe the principle of universality of human rights, reaffirm the approach that the U.S. traditionally has taken with respect to the principle of universality, acknowledge more fully the significance of international human rights treaty obligations the U.S. has voluntarily assumed, and refrain from encouraging the U.S. to reverse its longstanding foreign policy position on the fundamental importance of the universality of rights. It urges the Commission to instead encourage the U.S. to conduct its foreign policy in a manner that promotes equal respect for the human rights of all persons.

The full text of the comment is available here: https://www.jbi-humanrights.org/JBI%20Comment%20on%20Commission%20on%20Unalienable%20Rights%207-24.pdf

20th Anniversary of Beijing Women’s Conference: JBI Director Featured in New Film Account

On the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the Beijing Women’s Conference, the women’s leadership platform “Makers” produced “Once and for All,” a documentary film that tells the story of the pivotal conference that recognized women’s rights as human rights. The filmmakers identified 20 women who helped the conference become a reality, including JBI Director Felice Gaer, and a clip about her is available here and below. More information, and a link to the full film can be found here.

As a public member of the US delegation, Gaer played a key role, working closely with US Ambassador Geraldine Ferraro and others, to negotiate and gain support for language affirming women’s rights as human rights, and ensuring violence against women was addressed as a human rights violation, requiring monitoring of abuses and accountability of perpetrators.

Connected to this, Gaer wrote a widely cited article entitled “And Never the Twain Shall Meet? The Struggle to Establish Women’s Rights as International Human Rights,” published by the American Bar Association in a 1998 volume entitled The International Human Rights of Women: Instruments of Change. You can find the article here.

 

Beijing+20: Looking again at violence against women

To mark the commemoration of the 20th anniversary of the Beijing World Conference on Women (Beijing plus 20) during the current session of the UN Commission on the Status of Women,  JBI’s director Felice Gaer writes when and why private violence against women has become an issue of concern to States parties to the Convention against Torture on the blog of the World Organization against Torture.   

The blog post is available here.

JBI Calls for Release of Baha'i Leaders Unjustly Imprisoned in Iran

With the release of a new State Department report on religious freedom around the world, the U.S. government revealed the shocking fact that 116 members of the Baha’i faith are unjustly imprisoned in Iran solely for their beliefs. Among them, sadly, are seven prominent Baha’i leaders unfairly incarcerated since 2008.

Prior to their arrest, the two women and five men ranging in ages from 40 to 80 — Fariba Kamalabadi, Jamaloddin Khanjani, Afif Naeimi, Saeid Rezaie, Mahvash Sabet, Behrouz Tavakkoli and Vahid Tizfahm — worked together to attend to the basic spiritual needs of Baha’is in Iran such as marriages, divorces and Baha’i children’s spiritual education. After five years of confinement, it is time for members of the international community to demand an end to this injustice.

In an effort to call attention to the plight of the Baha’is in Iran, members of the United States Congress introduced legislation on March 12, S.Res.75 and H.Res.109 condemn the state-sponsored persecution of Iran’s 300,000-member Baha’i minority, which contravenes Iran’s international obligations as set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and other international instruments. Additionally, the resolutions call on the president and secretary of State to demand the immediate release of prisoners held solely on account of their religion and to sanction Iranian officials directly responsible for serious human rights abuses, including abuses against the Baha’i community in Iran.

JBI on Iran’s Must-See Sites of Oppression and Abuse for UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon

Despite warnings that attending the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) summit in Tehran would legitimize the regime’s abusive behavior at home and abroad, UN secretary-general Ban Ki-moon has decided to go. He seeks to meet with Iranian officials, including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.  Responding to criticisms of Ban’s plans, his spokesman argued that to skip the summit “would be a missed opportunity.”

It will be Ban’s first visit to Iran. On Friday, Iran’s top tourism official, H.M. Ajabi, told local press (IRNA) that the NAM summit offers a great opportunity for “boosting Iran’s tourism industry” and the Tehran Times reports that Ban has been invited to attend a meeting of the Human Rights Committee of the Iranian parliament.  Below are key sightseeing opportunities in Iran that the secretary-general should not miss if he is to be ready for this encounter:

Evin Prison:  This is Iran’s best-known site of cruel and prolonged torture, particularly of political prisoners, and secret executions. Among  the prisoners there were Fariba Kamalabadi and Mahvash Sabet, two of the seven imprisoned leaders of the Baha’i faith, Iran’s largest religious minority. American journalist Roxana Saberi met them while also detained in the notorious jail; she can help Ban identify them, should he seek their long-overdue release.

University of Tehran: On June 14, 2009, after widespread protests against the announced results of Iran’s presidential election, security forces broke open the gates of Tehran University and stormed campus dorms, indiscriminately arresting, beating and shooting students with pellet guns. Five students were reportedly killed and others seriously injured.  Authorities reportedly buried the dead within hours, without notifying their family members.  Student leaders currently imprisoned include Bahareh Hedayat, who called for holding security forces accountable.  Ban might ask for her to be released to offer a guided tour.

JBI Human Rights Papers: Human Rights in Iran

The Jacob Blaustein Institute for the Advancement of Human Rights (JBI) published a new advocacy briefing note on Human Rights in Iran, part of a new series of JBI Human Rights Papers.

Since it seized power in 1979, the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran has been engaged in committing a range of human rights violations against the Iranian people.  During and since the violent crackdown surrounding the June 2009 flawed presidential elections, Iran’s widespread and systematic pattern of human rights violations has intensified and increased.  Iranian authorities admit to arresting more than 4,500 protesters during the crackdown and a death toll of 37.  Many protestors were subjected to violations of due process, arbitrary arrest, detention and torture.  These and other tactics have been used to silence human rights defenders, political opponents, journalists and lawyers, and to discriminate against women, and religious, ethnic and other minorities.

2011 Nobel Peace Prize Speeches Emphasize Women’s Human Rights on UN Human Rights Day

The 2011 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded in Oslo on December 10, 2011 to three women "for their non-violent struggle for the safety of women and for women’s rights to full participation in peace-building work."  The Jacob Blaustein Institute for the Advancement of Human Rights salutes the recipients, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Leymah Gbowee, and Tawakkol Karman.

JBI calls for a rededication of individuals and governments worldwide to the effort to protect women from violence and other abuses of their human rights. JBI reiterates its call for the United States government to ratify the International Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, which 186 states have ratified. Excerpts from the inspiring Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speeches are below, in each case emphasizing the universality of the struggle for the human rights of women—and the importance of women in the struggle for human rights for all. The full speeches can be found at the Nobel Prize site.

 

Ellen Johnson Sirleaf

In its selection this year, the Nobel Committee has brought here three women linked by their commitment to change, and by their efforts to promote the rule of law and democracy in societies riven by conflict. The fact that we – two women from Liberia – are here today to share the stage with a sister from Yemen speaks to the universality of our struggle….

I also honor the memory of countless women whose efforts and sacrifice will never be recognized, but who, in their private and silent struggles, helped to shape our world. …[T]his award belongs to the people whose aspirations we have the privilege to represent, and whose rights we have the obligation to defend. We are but their reflection.

Honoring Elena Bonner (1923-2011)

Elena Bonner was a remarkable woman and human rights defender, widely eulogized in the week since she died at 88 following heart surgery in Massachusetts.

Bonner was, since 1972 the wife and after 1989, the widow of famed Soviet Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Andrei D. Sakharov – the moral giant who stood for human rights, peace and telling the truth.

Elena was herself a major public figure, as well as a demanding mother and doting grandmother – and a wonderful interlocutor, and a great role model. Her loss is huge.

She had many years of activism as well as repeated bouts of illness and infirmity. But it was her ability to rise again and again from infirmity to activism, to speak up and demand change, to exhibit courage when others were wilting from the repression that was directed against the tiny dissident/human rights community, for which we will always remember her.

And of course, for the many institutions she created and preserved, so the message and moral views of Andrei Sakharov will live on in Russia and beyond.

I first met Elena Bonner when she came to New York for heart surgery in 1986 – we even took this photo together, standing on Sakharov-Bonner Corner, just down the block from the Soviet Mission to the United Nations. Before and in the years in between, I helped carry out the rapid-fire demands and requests that Mrs. Bonner conveyed when she was able to get through on a rare, closely controlled international phone line out of Russia. Her requests, frankly, were endless. Or so it seemed. When I learned that her eye trouble stemmed from being wounded at the front in World War Two, I thought – how ironic – she could have been a great General! She understood the need to combine strategy with action – to fight on several fronts, and never to give up.

In a New Yorker tribute, David Remnick recalls how Bonner was slandered by Soviet spokesmen as a “sexual brigand” and “predatory Jew” who somehow led Sakharov astray, but he reflects on how she served as Sakharov’s protector, his ‘lion at the gate’ – and that she was “unafraid” and resilient.

Former New York Times reporter Serge Schmemann simply describes her as “formidable,” “imposing”, “peremptory” and a “sergeant –major.”

Let’s be clear: Elena Bonner was not a minor player, not a “sergeant-major”-- she was courageous, demanding, and effective. And that is why she was one of the great human rights defenders of our time.

She was well aware of who she was and, of course, of the worldwide renown which her husband Sakharov had gained since his famous 1968 essay on human rights, “Thoughts on Progress, Peaceful Coexistence, and Intellectual Freedom."

I recall vividly visiting her in Newton, Massachusetts, in 1990 – about 6 months after Sakharov's untimely death, but well before the collapse of the Soviet Union had even been contemplated. It was the day of the Wellesley College graduation, just one town away, and the Soviet 1st Lady Raisa Gorbachev was the commencement speaker alongside U.S. 1st Lady Barbara Bush. There was a media frenzy around this – the first time that Mrs. Gorbachev, who was accompanying her husband, President Mikhail Gorbachev, on a state visit, was given such a platform in the United States.

When I arrived, Elena’s first question was, “What do you think of Raisa’s planned speech?”

I said I thought it was disgraceful, since the only reason Raisa Gorbachev was asked to be the commencement speaker at Wellesley was because she was the wife of a famous man.

Well, Elena responded immediately, “You could say the same thing about me..."

When I recovered my balance, I protested to the contrary – all the things she had done herself, the causes she championed, the organizations like the Moscow Helsinki Group and a fund for the children of political prisoners that she founded, among others. She was no mere reflection of a powerful man.