| Statement
IWRAW Asia Pacific on the occasion of the 25th Anniversary of the
work of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against
Women
23 July 2007
United Nations Headquarters, New
York
Thank you Madam Chair,
I
speak on behalf of International Women’s Rights Action Watch
Asia Pacific, an organisation that is committed to the realization
of women's right to equality, by building capacity for the implementation
of the CEDAW Convention. IWRAW Asia Pacific believes that discrimination
is at the root of all forms of deprivation. In order to ensure realisation
of fundamental freedoms and human rights, it is critical to eliminate
discrimination against women in all forms and in all fields—
in both the private and public arenas. We know that the implementation
of the CEDAW Convention is central to the elimination of discrimination
against women and for the realisation of equality between men and
women. As a treaty monitoring body of the CEDAW Convention, the
CEDAW Committee is ensuring the implementation of the Convention
and eliminating discrimination against women from the world.
On
the 25th anniversary of the Committee’s establishment, we
take the floor today to congratulate the Committee and salute each
member, past and present, for their commitment, for their time,
and their continuous effort to expand international jurisprudence,
to ensure the application of universal standards to respect, protect
and fulfill women’s rights, without discrimination and to
bring about substantive equality.
The
Committee’s contribution in furthering women’s human
rights lies not only in the substantive part of its work, but also
in the processes it has adopted. The Committee’s expanding
commitment to dialogue with civil society not only enables it to
gain a more holistic view of the realities of women’s lives
in the reporting States, but also allows civil society to examine
issues from a rights perspective and seek normative resolutions
that contribute to enhanced advocacy and activism at the national
level. The Committee’s Concluding Comments also provides a
framework for monitoring State action. Concluding comments clearly
show the Committee’s rigorous engagement with States parties,
as well as its commitment to supporting the protection of rights
in the context of national realities.
The
Committee’s 25 general recommendations also bear testimony
to its ongoing commitment to expanding and institutionalizing human
rights norms for women. These recommendations are increasingly being
used around the world as sources of evolving standards of human
rights, reflective of emerging issues, offering possibilities for
overcoming the ever-increasing obstacles to the realisation of human
rights.
We
are very aware and appreciative of the extent to which the Committee
values the contributions made by national organisations through
the submission of alternative information and input into general
recommendations.
IWRAW
Asia Pacific has been engaging in (either engaged in or engaging
with) the reporting process since 1997. We strongly believe that
women must speak in their own voices about their own experiences
and realities. Therefore, we facilitate the participation of women
from the national level in the review process, build capacities
on the principles of the Convention, provide technical assistance
in the preparation of shadow reports and dispatch these reports
to the Committee members. This has been at the core of our “From
Global to Local” programme, which we have implemented in collaboration
with UNIFEM since 1997, and with UNFPA since 2005. The programme
has also contributed to the creation of a global movement demanding
accountability from States to fulfil their obligations towards women.
Through this programme we have facilitated the participation of
women in the reporting process from 113 countries.
To
date, the Committee has reviewed 154 countries, issued at the very
least 218 sets of concluding comments. It has a current backlog
of merely 41 countries, 15 of which will be cleared in this session
itself. Of the 185 state parties, only 31 countries have never been
reviewed by the Committee.
As
stake holders in the treaty body processes, we acknowledge the demanding
work of the Committee members in undertaking three sessions per
year, considering communications and conducting inquiries under
the Optional Protocol, and formulating general recommendations.
We are indeed proud to have been part of such committed and sincere
work.
We
would also like to commend the Division for the Advancement of Women,
which has worked untiringly to provide sterling support with the
utmost good humour not only to the Committee and States parties,
but to women from the national level who submit information or come
to the Sessions.
As
an evidence of impact we can see changes in law and policy, and
improvement in the status of women. Madam chair, I would like to
draw the attention of this august gathering to the ways in which
CEDAW has been used by women to claim their rights nationally. Asia,
the region I come from, is home to some of the successes of the
application of CEDAW, such as the recently passed Gender Equality
Act of Vietnam, the Domestic Violence Act of India and the Trafficking
Act of Nepal to combat violence against women and the Interim Constitution
of Nepal, all of which recognize reproductive health rights and
the right of women to be free from exploitation based on culture
and tradition — and recognised as a fundamental right based
on CEDAW principles and these are categorical outcomes of the impact
of CEDAW and it's Concluding Comments.
You
have been continuously monitoring the situation women, whether it
is in situations where women are more vulnerable as a survivor of
conflict or natural disasters such as the Tsunami. Giving statements
from time to time, you are not only calling governments and multilateral
agencies to attention and action, but also demonstrating that your
review and monitoring is not merely perfunctory and a routine part
of the periodic review process of treaty bodies but is a continuous
and vigilant process, reactive to changing global realities.
The
decisions you have made under the Optional Protocol to CEDAW in
holding states accountable, e.g. for not having a domestic violence
law in Hungary, has built up the confidence in the communication
procedure as an effective mechanism for the fulfillment of rights,
and securing justice for the victim-survivor. While doing so, you
have always respected the principle of compliance with the technicalities
of the provisions of the treaty of the Optional Protocol and denied
submission where parties have not exhausted their recourse under
the national jurisdiction.
While
offering our appreciation of this body of work, we would like to
add some challenges ahead, not only in expanding the norms and effectiveness
of the OP CEDAW procedures but also in recognizing human rights
themselves. The lack of recognition of the right to sexual autonomy
and decision-making continue to be at the core of social and legal
systems that oppress, exploit and target women. Lack of adequate
conceptual understanding of substantive equality, lack of mechanisms
for holding governments accountable for timely reporting and inadequate
treaty incorporation at the national level are serious impediments
in the enforcement of the Convention at the domestic level. As a
result, the quality of life for women is still questionable; sex
disaggregated data are yet to be maintained, equal participation
of women and equality of result is yet to be realized. Normative
standards of rights that acknowledge the experience of the deprived,
marginalized and oppressed are yet to be framed.
Lack
of resources, and culture and religion can no longer be an excuse
used by our governments for continuing violation and discrimination.
Madam Chair, the time has come for the mainstreaming of social,
cultural and economic rights of women even as we aim for the realization
of civil and political right. We need to ask, why human rights do
not receive the same amount of focus, political will and resources
as business and the political-economy of states? In this present
day of global businesses, we also need to make the private sector
equally accountable for the economic empowerment of women.
Changes
in law, institutions, values and resources are all reliant on political
will for the practical realization of rights. In order to see more
tangible changes, harmonizing law is not enough, putting law in
place and focusing on planning development with devolution of power
and due diligence is critical. We need to work for withdrawal of
reservations and expansion of General Recommendations on Migration
and State Obligation.
In
this regard, we urge all governments, international organizations,
women’s and civil society organizations to work with the normative
framework adopted by the committee, and to prioritise allocation
of adequate resources and time, to continue and expand financial
support to the work of eliminating discrimination against women.
CEDAW’s
underlying principles of non-discrimination, substantive equality
and State obligation, applying to private and public spheres, have
demonstrated to the international community the inherent holistic
nature of human rights. We call on State Parties who have not ratified
the OP to CEDAW to have more faith in their own intention, will
and capability to fulfil their obligations to their women and ratify
the Optional Protocol.
In
looking back at the distance the Committee has already travelled,
we wish it all the best for the road ahead. As always, we walk towards
the challenges, and in considering what has been achieved so far,
IWRAW Asia Pacific would like to assure the Committee, of our support
for the realisation of the Convention, and the actualisation of
the human rights of women. Congratulations once again.
(Delivered
by: Sapana Pradhan Malla, Board of Directors, IWRAW Asia Pacific)
HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
STATEMENT BY INTERNATIONAL WOMEN’S RIGHTS ACTION WATCH TO THE WORKING GROUP TO DEVELOP THE MODALITIES OF THE UNIVERSAL PERIODIC REVIEW MECHANISM (UPR)
20 November 2006
International Women’s Rights Action Watch (IWRAW), an international organisation based in Malaysia works for the realisation of women’s human rights through the lens of the CEDAW Convention and other international human rights treaties. We have a significant presence in 14 countries of South and Southeast Asia with some work being carried out in East Asia , the Pacific and Central Asia .
IWRAW makes the following submissions on each of the elements listed out by the Working Group on the UPR.
Terms of reference/basis of review:
The main basis for the review is the fulfilment of each State of its human rights obligations and commitments, irrespective of the State’s political, economic and cultural systems. The HRC is required to examine State’s implementation of human rights obligations through all international human rights standards, including the CEDAW Convention. Focus must be on women’s human rights, specifically gender equality and the multiple forms of discrimination faced by women. Furthermore, there needs to be a common normative basis for the review of all States and a common format that would be applied to all States to ensure equality of treatment. The normative basis should address all human rights and fundamental freedoms without any distinction. All human rights should mean to include not only human rights spelt out under the treaties, but also the rights contained in the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Declaration, and the pledges made by governments at world conferences and summits. The UPR mechanism should be based on the principle of universality of human rights and include economic, social, political, civil and cultural rights as well as the right to development.
Objectives and principles of the review:
As the main objective of the UPR is to ensure improved implementation of human rights obligations and standards by all Member States, it should respect the following principles:
- Information to the Human Rights Council (HRC) should flow from objective and reliable sources, including national and international NGOs;
- While accepting information on women’s human rights the HRC could call for data on women from multiple sources and ensure that such data is disaggregated on the basis sex;
- Equal treatment and non-selectivity among States;
- Transparency – in the collection of information, during review process, the interactive dialogue, the outcome and follow-up and implementation of recommendation;
- Capacity-building of the State and civil society;
- Cooperative mechanism based on interactive dialogue with full involvement of the State concerned.
Periodicity and order of review:
As there is wide consensus that the periodicity of review should be three years, there should be scope for the UPR mechanism to have intersession meetings. That apart, the HRC must also be prepared to take ‘urgent action’ against mass atrocities and respond swiftly to early warnings.
Preparatory process of review:
As the time available for each review is very short there should be a thorough preparatory process that precedes the plenary discussion. The OHCHR would prepare a ‘country dossier’ taking into account observations and recommendations of Treaty Bodies, Special Procedures and reports from UN sources, NHRIs and NGOs. Thereafter, the HRC Bureau could appoint an independent ‘session rapporteur’, from a roster of experts prepared by the OHCHR. The ‘session rapporteur’ would visit the State and meet with all stakeholders and prepare a background note on the human rights situation in the reviewed State. The ‘country dossier’ and the background note of the ‘session rapporteur’ should contain information on gender equality and women’s human rights. Based on the background report and the ‘country dossier’, the ‘session rapporteur’ should prepare a questionnaire, which should include questions on women’s human rights and the fulfilment of the State of the Concluding Comments of the CEDAW Committee. The questionnaire should be sent to the State under review in advance and should be available on the OHCHR website for stakeholders like NGOs, NHRIs etc. to submit their alternate information.
Conduct of the review:
The review needs to be conducted by a subsidiary body of the HRC. The subsidiary body should be composed of independent experts to be appointed by the HRC and one HRC member from each regional group. There must be gender balance in the appointment of independent experts and such experts would have expertise on gender equality and women’s human rights. While examining States fulfilment of human rights obligations, the principles and standards set by the CEDAW Convention and the Committee should be followed. The body conducting the review must permit the participation of NGOs in the interactive dialogue between the State under review and the HRC.
Outcome and follow-up to the review:
The UPR must lead to recommendations that include measures of technical assistance and capacity-building, and in more serious cases, the follow-up should consist in appointing a country rapporteur, a commission of enquiry, or even the adoption of a country specific resolution. The strongest outcome of the UPR would be the adoption of a country specific resolution, which should be more “results-oriented”. However, such country resolution should be adopted only if recommendations made to the State during the first review are not implemented and if the State does not take measures to correct the human rights concerns identified during the review. The UPR mechanism could be utilised to urge countries to ratify all Treaties and Optional Protocols not ratified by the State. The review must be conducted in a positive and constructive spirit, avoiding confrontation and giving consideration to the capacity-building needs not only of the State concerned, but also of civil society. Finally, the review mechanism could develop indicators on key elements like freedom of the press; right to information; freedom of religion etc. for assessing accountability of States.
Back
to top
This
page was last updated on December 4, 2006
“IWRAW
Asia Pacific is an independent, non-profit, NGO in Special consultative
status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations.”
©IWRAW Asia Pacific
Contact Us | Site
Map |
