Le Conseil des droits de l'homme (CDH) est un organe intergouvernemental clé du système des Nations Unies, responsable de la promotion et la protection des droits humains autour du globe. Il se réunit trois fois par an en session ordinaire, en Mars, Juin et Septembre. Le Bureau du Haut-Commissariat des Nations Unies aux Droits de l’Homme (HCDH) constitue le secrétariat pour le CDH.
Débat et adopte des résolutions sur les questions globales des droits humains ainsi que sur la situation des droits humains dans des pays particuliers
Examine les plaintes des victimes de violations des droits humains et des organisations activistes, au nom des victimes de violations des droits humains
Nomme des experts indépendants (que l'on connaît sous le nom de « Procédures Spéciales ») pour réviser les cas de violation des droits humains dans des pays spécifiques, ainsi que pour examiner et suivre des questions globales relatives aux droits humains
Prend part à des discussions avec les experts et les gouvernements sur les questions de droits humains
Évalue les bilans des États membres de l'ONU en matière de droits humains tous les quatre ans et demi, dans le cadre de l'examen périodique universel.
La prochaine session du CDH a lieu à Genève, en Suisse, du 30 juin au 17 juillet 2020.
AWID travaille avec des partenaires féministes, progressistes et du domaine des droits humains pour partager nos connaissances clé, convoquer dialogues et évènements avec la société civile, et influencer les négociations et les résultats de la session.
Para dar ênfase à complexidade do financiamento de várias formas de organização feminista;
La lutte pour un monde rempli de lieux de travail exempts de toute forme de discrimination, de stigmatisation et d'exclusion est une lutte noble. Un monde où le travail sexuel est décriminalisé et reconnu comme travail en fait partie intégrante.
Un monde où tous·tes les travailleur·euses ont des conditions de travail sûres, des salaires décents et peuvent jouir des mêmes droits tels que l'accès à la santé, le droit à la retraite, aux congés maladie, aux vacances, à la sécurité de l'emploi et plus encore, quels que soient leur genre, leur race, leur origine ethnique, leur âge ou leurs capacités. Les droits du travail sont des questions féministes, et les syndicats féministes jouent un rôle clé dans la promotion des droits juridiques, du travail et économiques de tous·tes les travailleur·euses, en particulier les travailleur·euses migrant·e·s, les travailleur·euses domestiques, les travailleur·euses informel·les et les travailleur·euses du sexe. Ce sont ces personnes qui ont récemment été touchées de manière disproportionnée par la pandémie, sa crise des soins, les confinements, les couvre-feux ainsi que la surveillance et la répression policière accrue. Nous vous présentons ici les histoires de militantes féministes et syndicalistes qui se battent pour de meilleures conditions de travail et un monde meilleur pour tous·tes.
Mona was an economist and an independent consultant on gender and development issues.
She was a former Professor of Economics and Director of the Institute for Women's Studies in the Arab World at the Lebanese American University.
She passed away suddenly on January 6, 2018.
Friends and former colleagues say of Mona: “When we celebrate her life, the best thing we can do is commit to continuing what she started: gender equality no matter what.”
Anti-rights actors have had a substantive impact on our human rights framework and the progressive interpretation of human rights standards, especially rights related to gender and sexuality.
When it comes to the impact of conservative actors in international policy spaces, the overall picture today is of stasis and regressions.
We have witnessed the watering down of existing agreements and commitment; deadlock in negotiations; sustained undermining of UN agencies, treaty review bodies and Special Procedures; and success in pushing through regressive language in international human rights documents.
The CSW, held annually in March, has long been one of the most contested sites in the UN system. In March 2015, conservative efforts set the tone before events or negotiations even began; the outcome document of the Commission was a weak Declaration negotiated before any women’s rights activists even arrived on the ground.
At 2016’s CSW, the new Youth Caucus was infiltrated by large numbers of vocal anti-abortion and anti-SRHR actors, who shouted down progressive youth organizations. Again, intensive negotiations resulted in a lacklustre text, which included regressive language on ‘the family.’
Precisely when addressing women’s human rights is of urgent importance, the CSW has been rendered a depoliticized and weakened space. Using it to advance rights has become harder and harder since progressives’ energy is taken up trying to hold the ground against conservative backlash.
As the intergovernmental body responsible for the promotion and protection of human rights around the globe, the HRC is a key entry point for conservative actors. In recent years, this mechanism has been the scene for a number of damaging anti-human rights moves.
In conversation with other anti-rights actors, one strategy of conservative states, and blocs of states, is to aggressively negotiate out positive language and to introduce hostile amendments to resolutions, most often resolutions focusing on rights related to gender and sexuality.
To take one example, during the June 2016 session of the HRC, opposition was mounted towards a resolution on discrimination against women by the member states of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and allies. During contentious negotiations, multiple provisions were removed, including women’s and girls’ right to have control over their sexuality, sexual and reproductive health, and reproductive rights; and the need to repeal laws which perpetuate the patriarchal oppression of women and girls in families, and those criminalizing adultery or pardoning marital rape.
The HRC has also been the site of pernicious conservative initiatives to co-opt human rights norms and enact conservative “human rights” language, such as that of the Russia-led “traditional values” resolutions, and more recently the “Protection of the Family” agenda.
In 2015, moving their sights to another front, a number of religious right organizations began to target the Human Rights Committee, the treaty monitoring body for the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), a pivotal human rights instrument.
Anti-human rights groups mobilized in hopes of cementing their anti-abortion rhetoric into the treaty.
When the Committee announced it was drafting a new authoritative interpretation of the right to life, over 30 conservative non-state actors sent in written submissions, advocating their misleading discourse on ‘right to life’ - that life begins at conception and that abortion is a violation of the right - be incorporated in the Committee’s interpretation of article 6.
Conservative groups targeting the Human Rights Committee was a shift considering that historically anti-human rights actors have repeatedly attempted to undermine and invalidate the essential work of the treaty monitoring bodies, including the Human Rights Committee.
Anti-human rights actors were involved in lobbying towards the development of the new Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015, focusing again on rights relating to gender and sexuality. These efforts had limited traction in their attempts to embed regressive language in Agenda 2030.
However, after successfully pushing back against progressive language in the final text, conservative actors then pivoted to another strategy. In an attempt to evade state accountability and undermine the universality of rights, several states have repeatedly made reservations to the Goals.
On behalf of the African Group, Senegal claimed that African states would only “implement the goals in line with the cultural and religious values of its countries.”
The Holy See also made a number of reservations, stating it was “confident that the related pledge ‘no one will be left behind’ would be read” as meaning “the right to life of the person, from conception until natural death.”
Saudi Arabia went one step further, declaring that the country would not follow any international rules relating to the SDGs that reference sexual orientation or gender identity, describing them as running “counter to Islamic law.”
Anti-rights actors have made increasing headway at the UN General Assembly (GA). Most recently, during the 71st session in 2016, the GA was the scene of feverish anti-rights organizing in opposition to the new mandate created by the Human Rights Council resolution on sexual orientation and gender identity in June 2016: the Independent Expert on SOGI. Four separate attempts were made to undercut the mandate in GA spaces.
One approach was to introduce a hostile resolution at the Third Committee[1], led by the African Group, which in essence aimed to indefinitely defer the new mandate. While this approach was not successful, such an attempt in the GA to retroactively block the creation of a mandate brought forward by the Human Rights Council represented a new and troubling tactic - anti-right actors are now working to directly undermine the HRC’s authority respective to the General Assembly.
Another approach targeted the Fifth Committee (responsible for administration and budgetary matters) as an entry point to attack the mandate. In an unprecedented move a number of States attempted (again, unsuccessfully) to block the funding of UN human rights experts, including the new IE on SOGI[2],.
While these multiple efforts were unsuccessful in blocking the creation and continuation of the new mandate, the significant support they received, the novel strategizing employed, and the strong alliances built along regional lines through negotiations point to difficulties ahead.
[1] The Third Committee of the GA deals with agenda items relating to a range of social, humanitarian affairs, and human rights issues. Each year it discusses and issues resolutions on issues including the advancement of women, the protection of children, family, and youth.
[2] While UN Special Procedures experts (i.e. Special Rapporteurs, Working Group members and Independent Experts) work pro bono, some funds are generally allocated to facilitate country visits on the invitation of the national government, and support staff.
Ursula fue una novelista estadounidense que trabajó principalmente con los géneros de fantasía y ciencia ficción.
Encontró la fama con La mano izquierda de la oscuridad, novela en la cual imagina una sociedad futura donde la gente es ambisexual: no tienen un sexo fijo. Indaga en los efectos del género y el sexo en la sociedad, y fue uno de los primeros grandes libros feministas de ciencia ficción. Ursula fue una inspiración por su escritura subversiva y original y también por los temas sobre feminismo y libertad a los que les daba tanta importancia.
En un discurso que pronunció en 1983 en el Mills College, en California, les dijo a las graduadas: «¿Por qué una mujer libre con formación universitaria debería o luchar contra el macho o servirlo? ¿Por qué ella debería vivir su vida en los términos de él? Espero que ustedes vivan sin la necesidad de dominar y sin la necesidad de ser dominadas».
Compilación de noticias sobre la organización y/o el trabajo de AWID
Notas de prensa, dosieres y kits
Liliana était enseignante argentine, tisseuse et également une écrivaine reconnue.
Sa trilogie « La saga des confins » a reçu plusieurs prix. Son œuvre est la seule dans le domaine littéraire fantastique à avoir eu recours et ré-imaginé la mythologie autochtone sud-américaine.
L’engagement de Liliana envers le féminisme s’est exprimé à travers les voix féminines diverses, riches et fortes de ses écrits, et en particulier dans le cadre de ceux à destination du jeune public. Elle a également pris position publiquement en faveur de l'avortement, de la justice économique et de l’égalité de genre.
Click on the image to open the PDF
 |
Where we are now |
Where we want to be |
Current funding by sector |
 |
 |
 |
| Download & share | Download & share | Download & share |
Нет, мы просим только один заполненный опрос от каждой группы.
Juana was an Indigenous Mayan Ixil, professional nurse and coordinator of the Farmers’ Development Committee (Comité de Desarrollo Campesino – CODECA).
CODECA is a human rights organisation of Indigenous farmers dedicated to promoting land rights and rural development for Indigenous families) in the Nebaj Quiché micro-region. She first joined CODECA as a member of its youth branch (Juventud de CODECA). At the time of her death had been elected to be part of the Executive Committee of the Movement for the Liberation of Peoples (MLP).
Juana’s body was found by neighbours by a small river on the road near Nebaj and Acambalam Village, Guatemala. According to CODECA, her body showed signs of torture.
La información contenida en esta comunicación es confidencial y está destinada exclusivamente la persona que lo recibe.
Esta comunicación podría contener información que es propiedad de la Asociación para los Derechos de las Mujeres y el Desarrollo (AWID, por sus siglas en inglés). Esta información no puede reproducirse ni diseminarse ni parcialmente ni en su totalidad sin el consentimiento escrito de AWID.
AWID no garantiza que la información aquí contenida sea completa o correcta. Esta comunicación no es una oferta para elaborar ningún tipo de acuerdo y no es una confirmación de ningún acuerdo descrito en este documento, a menos que el contexto indique claramente lo contrario.
AWID no está actuando en calidad de asesora de ningún acuerdo que pueda surgir de este documento, y esta comunicación no constituye una recomendación, guía o propuesta para elaborar un acuerdo.
AWID no garantiza o asegura los resultados esperados de cualquier acuerdo. Esta comunicación puede contener puntos de vista y opiniones que pueden no corresponderse con aquellos de AWID.
No tendrá derecho a utilizar la información contenida en esta comunicación con fines de llegar a cualquier tipo de propuesta de acuerdo u otro.