Executive Summary

Following the United States (US) Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization in June 2022, people residing in the US who can become pregnant are facing a human rights crisis. This urgent appeal to United Nations (UN) mandate holders, supported by a coalition of 196 signatories, details these intensifying harms, discusses the ways in which Dobbs contravenes the US’ international obligations, and sets forth calls to action.

With the Dobbs decision, the US Supreme Court overturned the constitutionally protected right to access abortion, leaving the question of whether and how to regulate abortion to individual states. Approximately 22 million women and girls of reproductive age in the US now live in states where abortion access is heavily restricted, and often totally inaccessible.

The harms of the Dobbs decision detailed in this appeal include: the impact on women’s lives and health; the penalization of healthcare, including criminalization; threats to privacy from increased digital surveillance; infringement on freedom of thought, conscience and religion or belief; and the disproportionate impact on marginalized populations. 

By overturning the established constitutional protection for access to abortion and through the passage of state laws, the US is in violation of its obligations under international human rights law, codified in a number of human rights treaties to which it is a party or a signatory. These human rights obligations include, but are not limited to, the rights to: life; health; privacy; liberty and security of person; to be free from torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment; freedom of thought, conscience, and religion or belief; equality and non-discrimination; and to seek, receive, and impart information.

The signatories call on the UN mandate holders to take up their calls to action, which include communicating with the US regarding the human rights violations, requesting a visit to the US, convening a virtual stakeholder meeting with US civil society, calls for the US to comply with its obligations under international law, and calls for private companies to take a number of actions to protect reproductive rights.

Download the Full Letter

More than 190 organizations and individuals, including health practitioners and human rights experts, today sent a letter to United Nations experts in response to the United States Supreme Court decision that repealed the constitutional right to abortion.

The letter documents how abortion restrictions imposed in the wake of the court’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization have deprived women, girls, and persons capable of pregnancy of their human rights to life, health, privacy, liberty, freedom from torture, and more.

It goes on to argue that the Dobbs ruling puts the United States in breach of obligations under several legally-binding international treaties it has ratified, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, and the Convention against Torture.

In addition to its call to action, the letter includes original research as well as testimony from physicians around the country. The full letter and list of signatories is here.

Dr. Christine Ryan, Legal Director at the Global Justice Center,issued the followingstatement:

“The protections of Roe had long eroded before the court’s ruling, but Dobbs put to rest any doubt of the United States’ failure to meet its human rights obligations. Decades of binding treaties have firmly established abortion as a human right. Now that the violation of this right is clear to all, the international community has a responsibility to act to hold the U.S. accountable.”

Christina Hioureas, Partner at Foley Hoag and Chair of the firm’s United Nations Practice Group, the law firm acting for the coalition,issued the following statement:

“Dobbs is the nail in the coffin on reproductive freedom in the United States. The consequences of Dobbs is that women, girls and persons capable of pregnancy across the United States are being deprived of critical access to health care and autonomy over their bodies and their lives. Simply put, women and girls will die as a result of this decision. The criminalization of access to reproductive health implicates the United States’ obligations under international law and is, thus, a matter of grave concern for the international community as a whole.”

Payal Shah, Director of the Program on Sexual Violence in Conflict Zones at Physicians for Human Rights,issued the following statement:

“The Dobbs decision has placed a target on the backs of pregnant patients and health care providers. The criminalization of abortion in many U.S. states has resulted in health care workers being mandated to act in complicity with violations of their patients’ rights, or to face imprisonment, professional sanction, fines, or harassment. As clinicians in this letter and around the country have shared, laws criminalizing abortion care will increase health disparities and impact the provision of health care across many specializations, from emergency medical care to family medicine to oncology and rheumatology. These harms will be most profoundly felt by Black, Indigenous, and low-income women. The international community, including UN Special Rapporteurs, must condemn this egregious rollback of human rights and affirm the U.S.’ obligation to ensure abortion rights.”

Lauren Wranosky, Research and Program Associate at Pregnancy Justice,issued the following statement:

“The Dobbs decision abandoned the constitutional right to abortion, violated U.S. legal obligations under treaties such as ICCPR, and exposed the fact that Roe was never enough. Many will continue to be jailed, convicted, and sentenced to prison for having abortions, experiencing pregnancy losses, or giving birth to healthy babies. This destroys families, inflicts trauma, and targets the most vulnerable by replacing healthcare with criminalization. We know this humanitarian crisis will only get worse, and we demand that the U.S. government join international peers as a leader in securing reproductive justice for all.”

Annerieke Smaak Daniel, Women’s Rights Researcher at Human Rights Watch, issued the following statement:

“Abortion is a form of health care needed more frequently by women of color, especially Black women, than white women in the US. Abortion restrictions compound economic, social, and geographic barriers to health care, including contraception, disproportionately impacting Black women’s ability to access the care we need. The US federal government is not meeting its human rights obligation to ensure access to abortion and to address and eliminate structural racism and discrimination in the US, and the impact on the health and rights of Black women is clear.”

Excerpt of Women's Media Center op-ed co-authored by GJC Legal Intern Katelyn Buckles.

In October, the United Nations Committee Against Torture issued a final decision in Elizabeth Coppin v. Ireland that once again dashed hopes of justice for survivors of one of Ireland’s worst regimes of torture and abuse. The committee, under its mandate to examine individual allegations of torture and ill-treatment around the world, ruled that Ireland did not violate the Convention Against Torture — despite repeatedly calling the Irish government’s investigation into torture in the Laundries over the years inadequate. By ignoring their own jurisprudence, the committee is setting a dangerous precedent for standards of future investigations into violence against women and girls.

In 1951, the Listowel District Court found Elizabeth Coppin to be destitute and illegitimate, meaning she was born to a single mother who could not afford to raise her. They then committed her to an industrial girl’s school, a system which has also been investigated for abuse and neglect, which later sent her to Saint Vincent’s Magdalene Laundry in 1964. The Laundries were religious institutions where at least 10,000 women and girls — many of whom were perceived to be “promiscuous” as unmarried mothers (or their daughters) or as burdens to their families or the state — were confined and forced to work unpaid, laundering and sewing for local businesses or government departments. Coppin was transferred to two other Laundries before being discharged in 1968 at the age of 19.

Read the Article

NEW YORK — A United Nations committee today passed a resolution that advanced the International Law Commission’s draft treaty on crimes against humanity. If eventually adopted by states, it would be the first stand-alone treaty that specifically addresses a broad range of obligations, including duties to prevent and punish crimes against humanity.

Introduced by the Gambia, the final resolution passed by the UNGA Sixth Committee was co-sponsored by a cross-regional group of over 85 countries and creates an “interactive format” for debate on the substance of the draft treaty over the next two years. The resolution represents significant progress after the topic has stalled in recent years following resistance from Russia, China, and its allies.

In 2021, prominent international law experts and practitioners from around the world — including former International Criminal court prosecutor Fatou Bensouda — signed a statement arguing the treaty would “close a crucial gap in the current international framework on mass atrocities.”

Akila Radhakrishnan, president of the Global Justice Center, issued the following statement:

“Today’s resolution represents the most significant progress on the treaty since work on it began in 2013. For too long, victims of atrocious crimes around the world have languished without a comprehensive international framework that specifically targets these crimes and requires the international community to prevent and punish them. As an organization dedicated to combating gender-based crimes around the world, we’re heartened to finally see action on this critical treaty after so many years.

“Year after year, progress on the treaty was stymied by a small cadre of authoritarian countries determined to halt human rights measures at every turn. In these cases, procedural objections were used as a cover for opposition to the treaty itself.

“We can’t allow this gap in the international legal system to exist any longer. Perpetrators of sexual and reproductive violence, enslavement, deportation, and other crimes against humanity are growing more emboldened thanks to an increasingly-weakening international order. We need this treaty now more than ever.”

NEW YORK — The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination today called on the United States to take all necessary measures — at the federal and state level — to provide safe, legal, and effective access to abortion in line with its international human rights obligations.

The recommendation came as part of the committee’s “concluding observations” following its review of US compliance with the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), which the US ratified in 1994. For more on US obligations on reproductive rights under ICERD, see this factsheet.

The concluding observations specifically noted the recent Supreme Court ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, citing its “profound disparate impact on the sexual and reproductive health and rights of racial and ethnic minorities.”

The committee questioned the US government in Geneva on August 11 and 12. During this session, it raised US abortion restrictions numerous times. The members were particularly concerned about disproportionate access to safe abortion for Black, brown, and indigenous women, as well as the prosecution of those seeking abortions post-Dobbs.

Dr. Christine Ryan, legal director at the Global Justice Center, issued the following statement:

“Make no mistake, the international community put the United States on notice today for the racist impacts of its recent regression on abortion rights. Even before the conservative majority on the Supreme Court overruled the constitutional right to abortion, they had dismantled abortion access for decades. Black, brown & indigenous women seeking abortion faced profound and disproportionate obstacles. After Dobbs, they’re facing nothing short of a gross and systemic human rights crisis.

“Today’s recommendation on abortion is well within the committee’s mandate. ICERD prohibits racial discrimination in access to healthcare and requires the elimination of laws that perpetuate racial discrimination. Abortion restrictions in the US violate these measures at every turn. Forced travel for abortion is more difficult for women of color. Coerced pregnancy is more dangerous. And criminalization will target them at higher rates.

“This is also a critical moment of international accountability for the United States. For too long, the US government has failed to fully implement the very human rights framework it helped create. The international community should take every opportunity to interrogate the state of human rights in the US and commit to reversing this damaging trend.”

The Rohingya genocide began on August 25, 2017. The so-called “clearance operations” were marked by murder, sexual violence, and community destruction on a massive scale. UN experts, the United States government, and others have recognized this genocide. Yet, justice continues to be denied to the Rohingya.

Along with our partners at the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect, we commemorate this historic crime and continue to stand in solidarity with the Rohingya and their struggle for justice.

Abortion Restrictions violate the right to health of women of color and perpetuate racial discrimination

Women and adolescents of color disproportionately suffer as a result of abortion restrictions. 

1. Women of color have a greater need for abortion care due in large part to the social, economic, and geographical barriers that limit access to healthcare, including contraception.

2. Systemic racism in the US criminal legal system means that women of color face a heightened risk of criminal prosecution for abortion. Pregnant people, particularly Black, Hispanic, and Indigenous women, are already policed and criminally punished for pregnancy outcomes.
3. Being forced to carry a pregnancy to term is especially dangerous for Black women in the US, who are three times more likely than white women to die from pregnancy-related causes. 
4. The economic costs and unpaid care burden of forced parenting are more challenging for women of color than for white women - women of color are already more likely to live below the poverty line, receive low wages, experience unemployment and suffer labor discrimination than white women. 

US foreign policy (including the Helms Amendment) severely undermines access to abortion for women and damages the health and lives of Black and brown women in Global South middle- and low-income countries. 

Recommendations

• Take federal and state legislative steps to guarantee effective access to affordable, legal, and quality abortion care.
• Remove the Helms Amendment restrictions on US foreign aid to ensure that development assistance and global health funds provide safe and quality abortion care and information.

Download Fact Sheet 

Introduction

“Racism in America is more than the fire hoses, police dogs and Alabama sheriffs you envision when you hear the words,” writes Petula Dvorak. It is also the tyranny inflicted on racialized women when they are stripped of their reproductive autonomy, shackled while giving birth, and excluded from lifesaving health care and information on cervical cancer.

This submission under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) discusses three sites of systemic racism and intersectional discrimination that oppress women of color, particularly Black women, in the United States (US): abortion restrictions, the shackling of pregnant prisoners, and racial inequalities in cervical cancer mortality. While many of the laws and practices described in this submission do not directly target women of color and are presented in facially neutral terms, they disproportionately impact the human rights of women of color. We urge the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD, or the “Committee”) to recognize the disproportionate effects of these policies on the lives of racial minorities and the racial inequalities that they perpetuate.

US abortion restrictions are a form of racial discrimination

1. In June 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States overturned the constitutional guarantee to access abortion. As a result, more than half of US states are poised to ban abortion; as of July 7, 2022, thirteen states have already criminalized or severely restricted abortion. Anti-abortion regulations affect all women and people who can become pregnant, but health inequities and racialized socio-economic inequalities mean that it is women and adolescents of color whose disproportionately suffer.

Read the full submission

1. This Memorandum identifies three potential avenues to advance the International Law Commission’s Draft Articles on Crimes Against Humanity to the next procedural step. It is intended as a practical, not a technical, guide.

 

2. The Draft Articles on Crimes Against Humanity have widespread support from States, yet opposition from a few States has caused them to stagnate in the United Nations General Assembly Sixth Committee due to the Committee’s tradition of acting by consensus.

 

3. Option 1 is for the Sixth Committee to act, by breaking consensus, if necessary. It could establish an Ad Hoc Committee to examine the Draft Articles on Crimes Against Humanity. Alternatively, there is precedent for moving directly to a Codification Conference or working directly on the Draft Articles as a Committee of the Whole.

 

4. Option 2 is for the General Committee to shift the Draft Articles on Crimes Against Humanity to the Third Committee or the Plenary of the General Assembly.

 

5. Option 3 is to pursue the development of a treaty on crimes against humanity either outside of, or adjacent to, the United Nations.

 

Download the Full Letter 

RÉSUMÉ

1. Le présent mémorandum identifie trois pistes potentielles pour favoriser la progression du processus d’adoption du Projet d’articles sur les crimes contre l’humanité élaboré par la Commission du droit international. Il a une visée pratique et non pas technique.

 

2. Le Projet d’articles sur les crimes contre l’humanité bénéficie d’un large soutien de la part des États. Cependant, l’opposition de certains États a bloqué le processus au sein de la Sixième Commission de l’Assemblée générale des Nations Unies dont les décisions sont traditionnellement prises par consensus.

 

3. L’option 1 consiste à inciter la Sixième Commission à jouer un rôle proactif pour relancer le processus, en rompant si nécessaire la tradition du consensus. La Commission pourrait mettre en place un comité ad hoc chargé d’examiner le Projet d’articles sur les crimes contre l’humanité. Une autre possibilité serait de se fonder sur un précédent autorisant directement le transfert du texte vers une conférence de codification ou son examen en commission plénière.

 

4. L’option 2 consiste à inciter le Bureau de l'Assemblée générale des Nations Unies à transférer le Projet d’articles sur les crimes contre l’humanité à la Troisième Commission ou à une séance plénière de l’Assemblée générale.

 

5. L’option 3 serait de poursuivre l’élaboration d’un traité sur les crimes contre l’humanité soit en dehors de l’Organisation des Nations Unies, soit dans le cadre d’un processus parallèle au système onusien.

Download the Full Letter 

Dear Mr. Secretary-General

We are writing with regard to your forthcoming annual report on children and armed conflict (CAAC). As you finalize your decisions regarding the annexes and inclusion of other situations of concern, we urge you to ensure the publication of a complete list of perpetrators of grave violations that is evidence-based and accurately reflects data collected and verified by the United Nations Monitoring and Reporting Mechanism (MRM). We further encourage you to draw attention to additional contexts where there is credible evidence that grave violations against children have been committed, by designating these contexts as ‘other situations of concern.’

As nongovernmental organizations working to alleviate suffering in humanitarian settings and protect human rights, we strongly support UN Security Council Resolution 1612 (2005) and subsequent resolutions on CAAC, as concrete tools for improving the protection of children in war. The MRM, the annual CAAC report, and its annexed list of perpetrators are a crucial foundation for enhancing the protection of children, ending and preventing violations, and contributing to accountability. These tools are central to drawing the attention of the Security Council to the situation of children, providing an analysis of the variety of violations committed against children, and paving the way for the UN’s engagement with parties to conflict. However, these mechanisms will only remain powerful if they are credible and consistently applied to all perpetrators in all contexts.

Read the Full Letter

To: Pramila Patten

Office of the Under Secretary General Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Sexual Violence in Conflict ( USG SRSG/SVC)

Re: Service Provision for Survivors of Conflict-Related Sexual Violence in Tigray

Your Excellency,

We the undersigned are writing to you at this time in accordance with the landmark United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 (S/RES/1325) on Women, Security, and Peace, adopted in 2000 that calls on “all parties to the conflict to respect fully international law applicable to the rights and protections of women and girls, in particular the obligations applicable to them under the Geneva Convention of 1949 and the additional protocols” to request for a response to the ongoing siege imposed by the federal government on the Tigray region of Ethiopia.

This siege, characterized by a total blockade of essential services and life-saving humanitarian supplies, has been predictably devastating to the civilian population of Tigray and even more particularly so to the survivors of brutal weaponized rape (Amnesty International, 2021) who have been denied urgent post-rape care as a result (Human Rights Watch, 2021). Even more alarming, domestic ability to provide support for survivors is curtailed completely as a result of the deliberate devastation of the Tigrayan health care system by Ethiopian and allied forces during active conflict and because even the most basic healthcare supplies are no longer available in Tigray (A. Mark Clarfield et al, 2022).

Read the Full Letter

Excerpt of Just Security Op-Ed co-authored by GJC President Akila Radhakrishnan.

The United Nations General Assembly’s legal committee again missed the opportunity to take action this year on the draft text of a new treaty on crimes against humanity proposed by the International Law Commission. The failure, in the form of a vote Nov. 18 on a draft resolution that simply took note of the draft articles, leaves a critical gap in the legal architecture for preventing and punishing mass atrocity crimes. The result deprives a range of victims and survivors the effective protection and justice they deserve.

As this series has demonstrated, it is imperative to adopt such a treaty for a host of reasons. Even amid substantive disagreements on what the new treaty should include, those cannot be debated and resolved until there is forward momentum and a concrete schedule for such discussions. However, despite overwhelming support from States to establish such a process this year, a few States that appear vehemently opposed to the project stalled concrete progress yet again.

Read the Article

Today, the UN General Assembly adopted the recommendations made by the Credentials Committee of the UN to defer the decision on who will represent Myanmar at the UN. The decision constitutes a clear rejection of the illegal Myanmar military junta’s application for credentials to the UN, leaving U Kyaw Moe Tun, the current Permanent Representative of Myanmar, to continue to represent the country at the world body.

The recommendation for deferral by the Credentials Committee comprised of nine UN Member States including the United States, China and Russia, is a huge blow to the murderous junta that have killed at least 1,303 people since the coup, including around 100 children, and arbitrarily arrested 10,681 people.  

Khin Ohmar, founder and Chairperson of Progressive Voice: “We welcome this decision by the UN General Assembly to reject the terrorist military junta and call on all UN agencies, funds and programs to cease all forms of cooperation that lend the junta any legitimacy. UN agencies must end its complicity in emboldening the junta by inviting them to meetings, conferences and other platforms that offers them the opportunity to create a façade of legitimacy.

International bodies, including the Human Rights Council, the International Labour Organization and the World Health Organization, must now accept nominations made by U Kyaw Moe Tun and recognize the authority of Myanmar’s Permanent Representative to the UN.”

Charles Santiago, chair of ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights (APHR), and a Malaysian Member of Parliament:“The UN General Assembly’s decision sends a strong message to ASEAN and other regional and international institutions that the junta must not be recognized as the legitimate representatives of Myanmar. Any engagement by ASEAN or any of its members with the military junta undermines its credibility and is an affront to the courageous and continuing calls made by the people of Myanmar to reject the junta.

As we saw in a graphic video shared on social media over the weekend of the military deliberately running down peaceful demonstrators, despite the risks, the Myanmar people are literally putting their lives on the line every day to reject the junta, and calling for their voices to be heard.”

Grant Shubin, Legal Director of Global Justice Center:“Today’s result is a vote of confidence for the rule of law in Myanmar—but much more remains to be done. The junta has committed crimes against humanity with its widespread and systematic attacks on the people of Myanmar. In addition to denying the junta the legitimacy it craves, the international community must also take positive steps to end the Tatmadaw’s impunity and ensure justice and accountability for Myanmar.”

On 10 September, 358 Myanmar and international civil society organizations called on the UN Member States to ensure that the current Permanent Representative of Myanmar to the UN, Ambassador U Kyaw Moe Tun, retains his position as Myanmar’s representative to the UN. See the open letter to members of the UN General Assembly here: https://progressivevoicemyanmar.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/UNGA_Credentials_FINAL_ENG.pdf

The 14 undersigned civil society organisations mark the conclusion of the UN General Assembly’s (GA) 76th Third Committee session with the following observations on both thematic and country-specific resolutions. We urge all States to implement the commitments they have made in the resolutions discussed below to their full extent.

We welcome the joint statement on reprisals led by the UK and joined by a cross-regional group of 80 countries (5 more than last year), calling on all States and the UN to prevent, respond to, and ensure accountability for intimidation and reprisals against those who engage or seek to engage with the UN.  We also welcome the resolution adopted at the Human Rights Council in September 2021 on reprisals, inviting the SG to submit the report presented annually to the Council also to the GA from next session.

We welcome the biennial resolution on human rights defenders focussing on the critical role defenders play in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, and the challenges faced in that regard. We also welcome elements on legal frameworks for their protection and the responsibilities of business. While we are encouraged by enhanced references to surveillance and counter-terrorism measures being used against defenders, we are disappointed that stronger language did not make it into the final text, despite support from civil society and some States. However, we hope that the consensus outcome and 85 co-sponsors, provides a basis for meaningful progress on these issues, and greater protection of defenders.   

We welcome the adoption of the resolution on Policies and Programmes involving Youth by consensus, recognizing the need to fulfill young people’s human rights and as key actors for sustainable development, while acknowledging their important role in decision making processes. The resolution stresses the need to tackle barriers limiting their participation and development, such as unemployment, poverty, gender inequality, multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination, HIV/AIDS, SGBV and access to technology. We welcome the strong references to human rights and fundamental freedoms of young people, and the need to note young people’s diverse situations and conditions in national development strategies. Lastly, we welcome calls for a high-level GA plenary meeting to commemorate the 30th anniversary of the World Programme of Action for Youth with the full and effective participation of young people. 

Read the Full Letter

Excerpt of Opinio Juris article by GJC Legal Director Grant Shubin.

Of the many perspectives offered by outside observers in the wake of the Myanmar military’s (Tatmadaw’s) attempted coup, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights cogently cut to the core of it: “This crisis was born of impunity.” 

As if to tacitly acknowledge this fact, in his first speech since illegally deposing democratically elected officials, Tatmadaw Commander-in-Chief Min Aung Hlaing told the people of Myanmar that, “no one is above the law”. He went on, “no one or no organization is above the national interest in state-building and nation-building.” But, of course, the Tatmadaw and Min Aung Hlaing have for a generation been above the law. 

This impunity, which finds its roots in the military’s privileged position baked into Myanmar’s 2008 Constitution as well as in the international community’s mortgage on Aung San Suu Kyi’s ability to politically navigate the country out of the military’s grips, was nevertheless beginning to show cracks.  And it is these cracks that make the crisis within the crisis—the question of who is credentialed to represent Myanmar at the UN General Assembly, the representative of the National Unity Government or the junta—so urgent. 

Read the Article

Excellencies,

We, the undersigned, representing a broad movement of 358 Myanmar and international civil society organizations, urge you to ensure that the current Permanent Representative (PR) of Myanmar to the United Nations (UN), Ambassador U Kyaw Moe Tun, retains his position as Myanmar’s representative to the UN for the upcoming 76th session of the UN General Assembly (UNGA), scheduled to begin on 14 September 2021.

Ambassador U Kyaw Moe Tun is the incumbent representative of Myanmar and he represented Myanmar throughout the 75^th session of the UNGA after his credentials were accepted by the Credentials Committee in November 2020 and approved by the UNGA on 1 December (A/RES/75/19). He was appointed as Myanmar’s PR to the UN by the democratically elected government of Myanmar, which had held office since 2016. His credentials were renewed by the current duly elected government of Myanmar.

The new government, which won in a free, fair and credible general election in November 2020, was due to be formed in February 2021 and take office in March. The general election, which was observed by accredited international election monitoring bodies including the Asian Network for Free Elections and the Carter Center, certified that the election reflected the will of the people of Myanmar. However, on 1 February 2021, the Myanmar military launched a coup, physically prevented the scheduled session of the new parliament and forcibly detained elected members of Parliaments.

Read the Full Letter

The Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda is, at its heart, an agenda led by civil society, who, in partnership with Member States and the UN, lobbied for the adoption of Resolution 1325 (2000). At this year’s Open Debate on Women, Peace and Security, we ask you to stand with the women human rights defenders (WHRDs), peacebuilders, advocates for gender equality and other civil society leaders who play a critical role in advancing our common goal of peace, human rights and gender justice, yet are under relentless attack for doing so.

To be a woman today in many parts of the world, particularly in a conflict zone, means having to choose between fighting for your rights, or fighting for your life.

We are deeply concerned by the crisis in Afghanistan and the plight of the many Afghan women civil society leaders, peacebuilders, human rights defenders (HRDs) and journalists at grave risk, who have either been forced to flee or remain trapped in the country since the Taliban took power. Afghan women have courageously and tirelessly fought for their rights for decades, despite conflict, deeply-rooted discrimination, corruption and poverty — they are now under threat from a regime that has an extensive record of brutality and repression of women’s rights. In recent months, women leaders, activists and journalists have been targeted and prevented from fully exercising their right to participate in all spheres of public and political life in areas under Taliban control. Women who are, or are perceived to be, lesbian or bisexual face additional risks of persecution.

Women human rights defenders in other conflict zones fare little better. In Myanmar, the women who led protests against the coup by the Tatmadaw in February this year are fighting against both the military and patriarchy. They have been detained, tortured and sexually abused for standing up for human rights and democracy, all while continuing to hold leading roles in the resistance movement. In Colombia, HRDs, especially Afro-descendant, Indigenous and LGBTIQ activists, are at heightened risk of gender-based violence for defending their rights, their land and their communities. Yemeni activists have warned that retaliation against women for participating in political life has reached unprecedented levels. South Sudanese defenders and peacebuilders both within and outside the country face routine targeting and surveillance. Palestinian WHRDs who criticize the Israeli occupation regularly face violence, raids, judicial harassment, arrest, assault and movement restrictions for carrying out their work.

Read the Full Letter

Excerpt of Pass Blue that quotes GJC Legal Director Grant Shubin.

The UN General Assembly passed its first resolution addressing the Feb. 1, 2021 coup in Myanmar, with 119 in favor, 1 against (Belarus) and 36 abstentions. This resolution was voted on the same day the Security Council held a closed meeting on the country’s situation, revealing little about what occurred in the session and still not producing a resolution on the matter.

Grant Shubin, legal director of the Global Justice Center, said, in part, “The bright sides of the General Assembly’s resolution, including the call on all nations to prevent arms flows into Myanmar, are in stark contrast to the Security Council’s failure to take decisive action.”

Read the Article

NEW YORK — The United Nations General Assembly today passed a resolution addressing the military coup in Myanmar. It is the first resolution from the general assembly since the coup on February 1.

This resolution comes on the same day of a closed-door briefing on Myanmar at the UN Security Council. The Council has issued several statements on the coup, but has yet to pass any resolution.

Grant Shubin, legal director of the Global Justice Center, issued the following statement:

“A resolution from the General Assembly is a necessary and positive step for the international community. But just like with Security Council actions that precede it, today’s resolution does not go far enough to meet the demands of Myanmar’s people.

“The bright sides of the General Assembly’s resolution, including the call on all nations to prevent arms flows into Myanmar, are in stark contrast to the Security Council’s failure to take decisive action.

“As the body responsible for maintaining international peace and security, the Security Council can no longer stand idly by while Myanmar’s military uses its decades-old playbook to commit widespread and systematic human rights violations. The time for closed meetings and toothless statements of concern is over.”

“The Security Council must finally do what women’s rights activists in Myanmar have been calling for for years — take concrete and decisive action to condemn the military and hold them accountable for international crimes committed against all of Myanmar’s people.”