Global Justice Center Blog

July News Update: Akila's First Year as President

Looking back on my first year as President of the Global Justice Center, I am so proud of all that we have accomplished. We were on the floor of the UN Security Council fighting to preserve gains on reproductive rights in the face of a hostile U.S. administration. Expert UN bodies, including the Fact-Finding Mission for Myanmar and the International Criminal Court, considered our legal analysis of gender-based crimes committed against the Rohingya in their work.

We are more motivated than ever to leverage our expertise into action to break down centuries of patriarchal oppression and inequality. With the steadfast support of our allies behind us and justice on our side, I firmly believe that we can make this vision a reality.

Read the Full Newsletter

Beijing+25: Push Back Against the Pushback on Women’s Rights

By Maryna Tkachenko

Next year, the international community will mark the 25th anniversary of the Fourth World Conference on Women. Back in 1995, the adoption of the Beijing Declaration and Platform of Action was celebrated as a promising commitment to gender equality, development, and peace. As Hillary Clinton declared that “human rights are women's rights and women's rights are human rights, once and for all,” the world witnessed a turning point for the global agenda on the advancement of women. A quarter of a century later, the fight to empower all women and girls and achieve gender parity is far from over. In the midst of growing backlash against women’s equality, shaping the Beijing+25 agenda must be a priority.

Leading up to the Beijing+25 conferences in 2020—which will be hosted in Mexico City and Paris—we must focus on the key issues surrounding women’s rights. Access to sexual and reproductive health rights around the world must be at forefront of the conversation,  in addition to fighting the persistence of gender discrimination, sexual violence, and oppression. Next year’s agenda cannot ignore the Global Gag Rule, abortion services for women and girls raped in war, and women’s right to be free from gender-based violence and degrading treatment. None of this can be done without implementing a feminist approach to humanitarian aid.

Continue Reading

Trump’s Gag Rules Hurt the Most Vulnerable Women

Excerpt of Ms. Magazine op-ed by GJC Legal Adviser Elena Sarver.

Over the last two and a half years, the Trump administration has waged war on women’s sexual and reproductive rights. The battles have played out internationally and here at home—driven by oppressive gag rules globally and domestically.

The Global and Domestic Gag Rules are just two of the repressive policies that the Trump administration has put in place to deny abortions to women. Both of these policies are intended to restrict access to necessary services and silence the conversation around abortion, ultimately causing great harm to women’s health and their lives. But while their names are similar, these policies target two different pools of federal funding. 

The Global Gag Rule is outwardly oriented, and prevents foreign non-governmental organizations that receive U.S. global health funding from providing or “promoting” abortions as a method of family planning. Trump’s iteration of the decades-old Republican policy expanded its scope from family planning assistance to global health assistance—restricting $8.8 billion in U.S. funding instead of $600 million.  

Read the Full Op-Ed

The Day of International Criminal Justice: Prosecuting Gender-Based Persecution

By Maryna Tkachenko

Today is the Day of International Criminal Justice, marking the 21st anniversary of the 1998 Rome Statute, the treaty that established the International Criminal Court (ICC). In terms of international justice, the ICC is the only permanent institution that aims to hold perpetrators of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and crimes of aggression accountable. Created to investigate and prosecute mass atrocity crimes, the ICC offers us legal mechanisms to bolster the rule of law, ensure justice for victims, and establish a normative framework that can deter future human rights violations. Although the court continues to face setbacks in gaining the support of powerful states and strengthening its authority, this July the world witnessed a monumental moment in the ICC’s history of prosecuting sexual and gender-based crimes.

Continue Reading

Q&A: The International Court of Justice & the Genocide of the Rohingya

Starting in October 2016 and then again in August 2017, Myanmar’s security forces engaged in so-called “clearance operations” against the Rohingya, a distinct Muslim ethnic minority, in Rakhine State, Myanmar. The operations, in particular those that started in August 2017, were characterized by brutal violence and serious human rights violations on a mass scale. Survivors report indiscriminate killings, rape and sexual violence, arbitrary detention, torture, beatings, and forced displacement. Reports have also shown that security forces were systematically planning for such an operation against the Rohingya even before the purported reason for the violence — retaliation for small scale attacks committed by the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) — occurred. As a result, an estimated 745,000 people — mostly ethnic Rohingya — were forced to flee to Bangladesh.

According to the UN Human Rights Council-mandated Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Myanmar (FFM), the treatment of the Rohingya population during the “clearance operations” amounts to genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes, the commission of which evokes specific obligations and responsibility under international law.

And yet, despite extensive and meticulous documentation, as well as a global outcry from the international community, Myanmar continues unabated in its discriminatory treatment of the Rohingya and accountability for these horrific international crimes remains elusive. This fact sheet examines current accountability efforts, including at the International Court of Justice (“ICJ”) and International Criminal Court (“ICC”) and seeks to clarify available avenues for justice for the crimes committed against the Rohingya population, with a focus on state responsibility for genocide.

Continue Reading